Slashdot Mirror
US Resists UN Push For Control Over Internet
sl4shd0rk writes "At present, several non-profit U.S. bodies oversee the Internet's specifications as well as DNS. The Unitied Nations, however, has expressed an interest in transferring control of the Internet from the United States. The UN's Dr. Toure says any change to the governance of the internet must be supported by all countries. The U.S. has refused, arguing that 'existing multi-stakeholder institutions, incorporating industry and civil society' will continue to oversee the 'health and growth of the interenet and all its benefits.' According to earlier reports, the push is backed not only by Russia, but China, Brazil and India as well."
No way could they get agreement on blackjack and hookers from the general assembly...
by UN one world government. Google Obama Agenda 21 for details.
It's hilarious to see the right wing nutters getting their panties in a bunch over the Obama / Agenda 21 conspiracy, since Agenda 21 was established in 1992.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
UN control of the Internet would kill the Internet as we know it. Long distance fees, requirements that you respect censorship laws in other countries, unique identification requirements, different regulatory classes for "service providers" and "consumers" are all on the table for the UN. Sure, they would do a great job of ensuring that everyone is happy -- everyone being defined as the governments that are represented in the UN, which include several powerful governments with strong and pervasive censorship campaigns.
Palm trees and 8
If I were other countries, I'd ask myself why any one country should be "in charge" of things like DNS.
Having any one country "in charge" greatly increases the temptation to further "balkanize" the DNS system, where ".com" means something in "most of the world" but something else in countries that force their ISPs to use an in-country, government-controlled DNS provider. By having an international body handle things like this, countries that don't get their way but who at least respect the process will be less likely to run their own DNS.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Then I got slapped, and I realized all the crappy things the UN does to try to expand it's own power.
You may make any and all complaints about U.S. control/dominance of the internet, and I accept them. I do not accept that UN control would be better, in fact I'm convinced it would be much worse.
I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
the way the US has done things, they're the lesser of evils compared to the UN. Especially when you toss Russia, and China, and other dictatorships, neo-dictatorships into the mix. The best solution in the end will end up being decentralizing the entire thing and keeping it away from any national body.
Om, nomnomnom...
...they should start their own Internet.
That's what will eventually happen. The internet will be balkanized along national boundaries, every country will control their slice however they see fit, and everyone will be happy.
Except the users.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
In general, the US can be browbeaten into keeping things neutral. SOPA/PIPA got shot down when China notified the US that blocking access to one of their sites would be similar to a naval blockade -- an act of war.
However, with the UN, this wouldn't happen. They can block sites at will, with zero recourse. Say someone in the US makes jokes about the Thai rulers. Their website can be dropped off the net. Similar if there is a site pointing out brutality in China or India. Poof, it is history, and there is no way to deal with it. The UN is subject to no law or no checks and balances.
No one, the USA nor the UN should "control" the internet. Anyone should be free to set up DNS servers and anyone else free to use any they want.
Anyone having "control" only means that control will be used for evil purposes in time. It's inevitable. The internet is too important for that. Technical standards should be set by an apolitical body of engineers. There should be no other influence of governments or political bodies. No nation's laws should apply outside their borders.
So far the USA has caused some problems, but the UN will cause worse ones as it will grant more control to authoritarian governments which want religious based censorship.
If control is what they want, they should invent, and pay for the development of their own internet equivalent themselves. Right now, all they own is their own servers and communications infrastructure.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
1992, the VERY YEAR that Obama stopped directing Illinois Project Vote. Coincidence?! Yea, probably.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
"Unitied Nations", seriously?
Do NOT handle ANY control to the brazilian government .
The first thing they will do is take down everything that will speak against their major corrupt politicianS (with big Plural) .
And the Brazilian LAW FORBIDS anonymity.
Brazil govt: PLEASE GO AWAY
There is several reasons why we buy: iphone (designed in US), use Facebook (made in US) and use Google (made in us).
And one of the reasons is that the US law and business way is more 'clear'.
(if you think I am wrong..do business in Brazil and you are going to see the red-tape/bribe Hell)
Russia and China?? Serious?? the same homies that are supporting the crazy lunatics?
The US president can be 'bad' but they are not MEAN like others.
Keep US control is the LESSER evil.
yes .... which is happening already. Try to watch netflix outside the US, the BBC olympic coverage outside the UK, buying certain products from overseas, and so on. Sure, yeah, proxies, but if those are ever used by more than a trivial % of users, they'll be shut down. For normal users, the internet is already balkanized.
You don't get it. The next presidential term will start in 2013, which is 21 years after 1992. This is obviously meant to commemorate the fact that the National Minimum Drinking Age act was passed two years after Obama turned 21, after it safely wouldn't affect him.
Don't you see? This is the Illuminati once again ensuring that its elite members can go out and party while us common folk get screwed, and then they have the balls to remind us all of how we're just complacent sheep!
Don't you see? Conspiracy theories make perfect sense if sanity isn't an issue for you!
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Meh. Agenda 21 is by far less a conspiracy theory than some things people think, plenty of cities(including my own) have already included some of their platform into their urban planning, so does it exist? Yep, is it real? Yep. Is it evil and insidious? Well I suppose that depends on how tight your tinfoil cap is. Is it "one world government" material? Meh..that's crackpot stuff. Personally, I'm leery of any supernational body where someone isn't elected giving "strong suggestions" on how to do something to a local government. It's kinda like the EU, don't like it.
Personally, I'd figure more Americans would be worried about their own DOJ and Holder, blackballing the committee hearings on illegal gunrunning to Mexico and killing 300 people, while letting the guns walk. That entire thing is a pretext for "see, look at all those guns--they're in the hands of criminals and they're getting back into the US and all the rest." That's not conspiracy work, that's already happened. The guns flowed both ways. And before, someone get's their panties in a twist and go "Bush did it too" indeed, though their guns were tracked. Holder, just let their guns go free, no tracking, notta. The DoJ has already backwalked on that one.
Om, nomnomnom...
All of those "balkanizations" are performed by the provider themselves. There is no separation between two parties that want to communicate, except for places like China and Iran. In other words, nothing is stopping Netflix from providing their services to everyone in the world aside from Netflix themselves (and of course their agreements with other people). The Internet itself is not fragmented: certain websites are, but that is their problem and their doing.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Don't accept the lesser of two evils, promote a better solution
Here is something that would go a long way: reduce the barriers to entry for peering with ISPs. The requirements many ISPs have for peering make it impossible for a small, community-run network to become part of the Internet; such networks generally wind up paying for service from a telecom monopoly.
A global network can be governed by its users (or at least those who have the equipment and expertise needed to participate); Fidonet comes to mind here.
Palm trees and 8
The US has "control" only in so far as everyone uses infrastructure (at least with regards to DNS) that is ultimately accountable to US companies. This is just de facto control, not de jure control. Anyone is free to set up their own alternate root system, from an individual up to a bloc of nations. Indeed there are other ones out there, just small ones. Larger ones can be set up. Nothing is stopping the EU from running their own root authority.
I can handle that kind of US control because it means that if push comes to shove, other people can do their own thing. The US has control only because others don't choose to exert the control they can have, it is a real anarchy. I do not want a system where the UN has statutory control, where people can't do their own thing because it is illegal per international treaty.
the tinfoil is strong with this one =]
The one thing the US does much better is protecting free speech. We can post pornography, hate speech (who defines that, by the way?), how to make bombs, things that our society and often our government both view as repugnant, but somehow, it's still legal. Not that we don't have occasional attacks on that, but our free speech tends to hold up in the end.
There are few places that would be as good as the United States to to host a network of free discourse. It may well be because of that that the most successful such network is based there.
The UN is a constituency of pro-censorship entities. The only reason they want to control the internet is so that they can control the internet.
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
Kinda like what Churchill said of Democracy: the worst system, except for all the others.
I am always surprised at now negative Americans (specifically those from the United Stated) are about the UN. Remember the UN has been in charge of international telephony standards for years (the ITU is a UN agency), and on the whole international telephony has worked OK.
If you aren't American, and even if you are a friend of America, American control over key parts of the Internet is a concern. An important utility is controlled by a foreign power. How would US citizens feel if their water or electricity supply was under the control of the British government? We are a democracy and have been good friends of the US for a long time, but I bet US cititizens would be agitating for those utilities to be under US control.
jeremy@jeremybennett.com www.jeremybennett.com
Oh no the guns were tracked with Bush but thanks for playing....
That's what I said.
and where the heck are all the supposed gun control laws that are supposed to come out of this conspiracy theory that the obama administration let the guns walk so they could enact gun control laws....nice one zippy.
That's part of the question, especially since the contempt charge was blocked by the democrats. Which means that other avenues are now needed to find out exactly what was going on and where, and exactly what watergatish type BS was going on. And exactly how far the rot goes. Either Holder did this all on his own, or Obama signed off on it as well. In which case there's a lot of stink. There's no conspiracy theory here, only facts, and pretexts. You might have missed the news back about 3 weeks or 4 weeks ago, back before the Aurora shooting of the Dem's wanting to push back in the Assault weapons ban, and several other things all at once "just in time" for the election.
Funny how a lone Canadian occasionally paying attention to your news catches this and you don't.
Om, nomnomnom...
Don't you see? This is the Illuminati once again ensuring that its elite members can go out and party while us common folk get screwed, and then they have the balls to remind us all of how we're just complacent sheep!
So, we are being screwed and we are sheep... So the Illuminati are screwing sheep?
You would think with all that money and power they could do better...
Or is there something about sheep that's being kept from the common people?
OMG, I see it now!
It does all make sense!
I am upgrading from tinfoil to Stainless Steel foil at once!
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office