Slashdot Mirror


The Most Important Meeting You've Never Heard of

An anonymous reader writes "In December the nations of the world will gather in Dubai for the UN-convened World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT – pronounced 'wicket'). The topic of the meeting is nothing less than the regulation of the Internet. Under the auspices of the International Telecommunications Union the governments of the world will review the international treaty known as the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITR). The last review of the ITR was in 1988 when the Internet was just aborning. The remarkable and reshaping growth of the Internet provides the excuse for the new review. What's really afoot, however, is an effort by some nations to rebalance the Internet in their favor by reinstituting telecom regulatory concepts from the last century." At least it's being held in a hotbed of unfettered online communication.

39 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All I ever read about is slavery. Is Dubai just a metaphor for "the rich can control everybody else" or is it a real country?

    1. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by somersault · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "A real country"? You mean like for example.. the US? The rich certainly don't control people there!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      All I ever read about is slavery. Is Dubai just a metaphor for "the rich can control everybody else" or is it a real country?

      Dubai is an example of the glorious harmony between (middle) east and west! A city that wraps the middle east's robust traditions of rule of law and enlightenment liberalism and the west's values of sober financial honesty in the civic-planning expertise of Vegas developers on PCP... Truly, an example for us all.

    3. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm not so sure they're an example for everyone: China arguably does even better by combining the political freedoms enjoyed by northeastern Europeans for decades, the environmental and labor laws found in many nations in southeast Asia, and the economic opportunities common to Central America.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not a whoosh: I'm saying that Chinese people have the political freedoms of the Soviets, the environmental protections of India (take a look at the Ganges), and the economic options of sweatshop labor vs subsistence farming.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Reverse whoosh!

    6. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Honestly I can't stand people who go out of their way to feel like a victim. The rich don't control people in the US. If you feel differently, your victimization is in your head.

    7. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by gsgriffin · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You're focusing on only what you want to hear. In the US, you can see and do a lot on the Internet. They are not trying to control 'everything on it'. You can watch your porn, put up plans to make a bomb and kill people, tell nasty lies about anyone you want. You can't steal something that someone else has created.

      Also go do your research rather than just listening to your political party of choice. About 97% of all of the taxes in our country are paid for by about 5% of the wealthy people in this country. In other words, we get our highways, police, national parks, etc...because the wealthy have paid their taxes. Take away the wealthy in our country and your taxes will double overnight. I for one am not wealthy, but I'm grateful to those who are and are paying taxes. BTW...the people that get the most back from the government are those that pay nothing. I'm shocked why they feel they should contribute absolutely nothing. Try living in another country...like India or anywhere in Africa. Even if you live at $2/day, you have to pay huge school fees and buy uniforms for your children if you want them to simply go to school. Can't afford it, they don't get an education. It appears you are concerned about the "poor" in America, but statistically, check out a global wealth calculator...several on the web...those living on welfare in the US are still in the top 20% of wage earner in the world for doing nothing. Not a bad gig. Don't like it, try living in another country and doing nothing and see what it gets you.

      The cell phone providers are not the internet. They are your ISP. They can charge what you are willing to pay. If nobody is willing to pay it, they will go to some other provider. The try to limit the traffic...not control it. They want to earn money. So does any business.

      Copyrights used to be easier because it was all physical or intellectual. Now the Internet has allowed people to copy what they didn't create for free and pass it around for others to have for free. Whatever movies you like or computers games or TV shows you may like, do you think they would exist if there was no protection at all and everyone could copy and pass them around for free? Really? The reason they can still be in business is because our government is trying so hard to protect and make it illegal to takes what someone has created and pass it around for free. If the US didn't pay to go to the movies, buy DVD, and rent the movies, I'd have a hard time believing that anyone in Hollywood would be willing to put up $100M to make a great movie. They'd loose all their money.

      Go ahead and explain to us how and why anything would be developed (pharma, entertainment, software) if nobody is willing to pay for it and just waits to get it for free. I'd love to know how that system works?

      --
      jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
    8. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by Hadur · · Score: 2

      I think you have some facts wrong. 97% of the taxes in the US are paid by the top _50%_ of the people in the country. Still a lot, but nothing like what you were saying. http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

    9. Re:Is there any GOOD news from Dubai? by KhabaLox · · Score: 4, Informative

      97% of the taxes in the US are paid by the top _50%_ of the people in the country.

      97% of the income tax. There are a lot of other taxes. For example, payroll taxes, which amount to about 7.5% of an employees first $105k in income, (so it's actually a regressive tax. That is paid by every employed person, regardless of income. Sales tax is another one not included.

      And then, if you want to talk about the larger issue of funding the government, there are loads of fees (nearly) everyone pays, from car registrations, to fees on your telephone bill, etc. To mention only the income tax as OP did, is disingenuous.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  2. it became what it is.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The internet became what it is and revolutionized human communication precisely because it was not regulated. It was an anarchy, and should remain one.

    1. Re:it became what it is.... by jythie · · Score: 4, Informative

      Problem is.. it is not one and never has been. What needs to be figured out over the coming decades is, will the US unilaterally regulate it, or will an international organization do so. Neither is a particularly good option, but I doubt we will have much other choice.

    2. Re:it became what it is.... by swalve · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ridiculous. The content wasn't regulated, but the nuts and bolts are. Things like TCP/IP and routers and shit. You are confusing the roads for the route.

    3. Re:it became what it is.... by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Informative

      It was an anarchy

      ... created by those well-known anarchists at the US Department of Defense, with funding and public support from that well-known anarchist Al Gore.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:it became what it is.... by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about the US regulate the servers and routers that are in the US, and other countries regulate those in them?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:it became what it is.... by JWW · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If ever there needed to be proof the legislators NEVER think of unintended consequences of the laws/programs they create, the Internet is it.

      There is NO WAY IN HELL that if they had known what the Internet would become that they would have passed the legislation and funded the programs that spawned it in the way that they did. They would have ensured the regulatory capture first, which would have saved them all this hassle of a rear guard action of trying to achieve it now.

      The Internet's success was probably the most serendipitous accident in human history. Had the lawmakers actually really known exactly what they were doing, I am certain they would not have done it.

      Please note that I am not at all inferring that the engineers and technical experts working at DARPA at the time didn't know exactly what THEY were doing...

    6. Re:it became what it is.... by jythie · · Score: 2

      The irony, of course, being that the 'world wide web' was invented by people at CERN, which is swiss/french.... so under that logic the EU should regulate the web and the US would regulate routing, I guess.

  3. aborning? by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 2

    I would have said, "in its formative years"..

    That said, thanks for the new word.. it's well cromulous.

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    1. Re:aborning? by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      You know, if you look a word up in the dictionary to see if it's real, slang, or newly coined you look a lot less stupid. Aborning is a real word, "cromulent" was invented in a cartoon making fun of making up words.

      Definition of ABORNING
      : while being born or produced
      Origin of ABORNING
      1a- + English dialect borning (birth)
      First Known Use: 1916
      2aborningadjective
      Definition of ABORNING
      : being born or produced
      Examples of ABORNING

      First Known Use of ABORNING
      1943
      Related to ABORNING
      Synonyms: nascent, budding, inceptive, inchoate, incipient
      Antonyms: adult, full-blown, full-fledged, mature, ripe, ripened

    2. Re:aborning? by swalve · · Score: 2

      Regardless, it's a stupid word that seems to have been used simply because someone's thesaurus suggested it. It's one of those word-salad words you see in power supply reviews, used simply to adhere to the fake rule of not using the same word twice.

    3. Re:aborning? by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It only seems stupid to you because it looks made up out of the word born.

      There's nothing stupid at all about dusting off a lesser known word and holding it up to see if it should regain some stature.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  4. Reading the draft treaty by jbolden · · Score: 4, Informative

    I read through the very early draft: http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/draft-future-itrs-public.pdf

    It seems like the focus is mainly compensation structure and what obligations exist for telcos passing traffic through. Content provisions are light. For example

    Member States are encouraged:
    a) to adopt national legislation to act against spam;
    b) to cooperate to take actions to counter spam;
    c) to exchange information on national findings/actions to counter spam.

    This is a crucial treaty in the way the public water system is crucial to public welfare. Its existence is a matter of public interest, the details of implementation not so much. Most people want their messages to pass but don't really care how telcos pass expenses around.

    1. Re:Reading the draft treaty by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, but it dovetails with 'how dare those dang foreigners interfere with the US!' narrative,. so it is getting lots of hyperbolic attention and fear that the US will be under UN control. Exceptional-ism is still a pretty strong meme in the US, and anytime a story comes out that someone other then the US might have power or that the US isn't a unilateral power that can do whatever it wants unquestioned, it gets whipped up into an expletive storm.

    2. Re:Reading the draft treaty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The medium is the message: Governments and Industry are at the table and we aren't.

    3. Re:Reading the draft treaty by jbolden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm American and yes treaties aren't popular here. Though in all fairness most Americans in almost all their practices live in a world where on most things the US congress is the final authority. There is no American version of Brussels. Further remember that 1/2 of Americans haven't been out of the country, for many Americans their primary view of foreign countries are the stories about how their family fled and images on news programs emphasizing how much the USA is hated globally. So a large percentage of American population are isolationist. I good deal of the US probably wouldn't mind a US internet, that is loosely connected to other nation's networks; like the telephone system rather than a genuinely global system. Which isn't hypocrisy but rather a deeper desire to move away from empire.

      That being said, we also do have foreign policy hawks and then business interests that like US domination rather than US participation.

    4. Re:Reading the draft treaty by Hentes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm European and I think you are an idiot for bringing nationalism into a debate about the global net. Like it or not, the Internet has become what it is under American control, they developed it and built it up to a thing that fundamentally changed our lives. That's why I trust them much more than the barbarian-dominated UN. America is still the land of the free and one of the most liberal places in the world, and while I don't like it when they try to force that liberalism on the political or economical systems of other countries, that freedom is crucial for the Internet to function. The Internet is a worldwide thing, and national legislation of it is bullshit and would just fracture it into small subnets, ruining its biggest strength. And while I would love if it was led by a global organisation of professionals, that has exactly zero chance. In the current situation most countries only support the treaty because they want to censor the net and want to introduce tariffs on throughgoing traffic. This is a move to give politicians even more control over the net.

  5. Gandolf metaphor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Gandolf: "No! You must understand... I would use this ring from a desire to do good, but through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine".

  6. Re:I've never been to Dubai by Copley · · Score: 4, Informative

    Out of the way for who?! The "nations of the world" are attending, not just the US [I'm guess you're from the US with your rather parochial ways]. Dubai seems pretty central to me.

    --
    I am bald
  7. HO Ho by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Discussing Unfettered communication" in the UAE is like discussing celibacy in a brothel.

    1. Re:HO Ho by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which is to say, it's a fantastic time saver if the plan is to consider, but then reject, the idea...

  8. Well, bollocks to that. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a non US citizen, I hope this fails completely and the US maintains control.

    As far as I can see, the US can be pretty crap, but they are by far the least worst option. if you think the US is bad look at the free speech protections of every single other country in the world.

    Presumably, this meeting won't actually mean anything unuless America decides to cede control. I don't se why they would actually do that.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  9. Internet regulation inevitable... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To avoid wealthy-elite/government domination of communications, you'll need an open source, wireless mesh internet, sort of like these guys (http://www.shareable.net/blog/afghans-build-open-source-internet-from-trash-0), to create an "underground" internet, perhaps literally (http://www.borderlands.com/newstuff/research/FelixRadio/FelixRadio.htm).

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  10. Re:I've never been to Dubai by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

    Glad that my tax money is being spent on sending government employees to such an out-of-the-way place.

    Your gasoline money paid for the place so what's a few airplane tickets?

    --
    No sig today...
  11. ITU attempted to replace TCP/IP back in the Day by seawall · · Score: 5, Informative
    OK, many people involved are probably retired or dead by now, but way back in the early eighties there was the ISO networking standard which was to replace TCP/IP and it was HEAVILY pushed by ITU. It had it's charms but man it was heavy.

    "ISO will replace TCP/IP in 5 years" was a real thing. After 10 years the phrase became a joke. Now it isn't even that.

    Ever wondered why the L in LDAP stands for "Lightweight"? It started as a radically simplified version of ISO directory services.

    Almost nobody used ISO (including ITU, which at the time preferred paper over networks internally) but ITU really pushed it over that toy internet thing. They also charged a lot of money to buy the bookshelf-meters of ISO documentation...only available on paper for the most part.

    It is probably completely unfair to the ITU of 2012 but I find myself worried whenever they are mentioned in the same breath as "internet".

  12. Now that I've head of it... by davidwr · · Score: 2

    What's the new Most Important Meeting I've Never Heard Of?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  13. Yub Yub by AtomicBison · · Score: 2

    WCIT – pronounced 'wicket'. Wicket as in Wicket Wystri Warrick? - "Starcruiser go CRISH CRISH!" CRISH CRISH as in the internet plummeting to it's doom? I see what they've done here....

  14. Re:I've never been to Dubai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why not a map weighted by GDP? Why not a map weighted by number of internet users? Why not a map weighted by bytes per capita? Why not a location that reduces the total amount of travel? I'll bet you're from somewhere that doesn't give a shit about carbon footprint. But since this is a Telecommunications Conference, why don't they try teleconferencing?

  15. Yup by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2

    Dubai is an example of the glorious harmony between (middle) east and west!

    Kinda like Cleveland.

  16. Entitlement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If 5% of the wealthy contain 97% of the wealth, they should be paying 97% of the taxes (hint: that number is wrong, its less). One penny less should be a crime.

    The people that get the most out of government money are the ones that own businesses. Those roads your trucks go down: Tax money. Those police that keep your riches safe: Tax money. Those laws that forbid mere private citizens from participating in the arbitrage that made the wealthy and keep them so: Tax money.

    There is no respect to be found being an apologist. You don't deserve it.