US Offers New Plans 1 Month Before UN Meeting To Regulate Web

Velcroman1 writes "Slashdotters have been reading for months about the upcoming ITU conference next month in Dubai, which will propose new regulations and restrictions for the Internet that critics say could censor free speech, levy tariffs on e-commerce, and even force companies to clean up their 'e-waste' and make gadgets that are better for the environment. Concerns about the closed-door event have sparked a Wikileaks-style info-leaking site, and led the State Department on Wednesday to file a series of new proposals or tranches seeking to ensure 'competition and commercial agreements — and not regulation' as the meeting's main message. Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. envoy to the conference, says the United States is against sanctions. '[Doing nothing] would not be a terrible outcome at all,' Kramer said recently."

Comments

Anything that comes out of the UN

[na1led]

is going to be bad for the rest of us.

Re:Anything that comes out of the UN

[CanHasDIY]

Apparently to shit-talk the US for no particular reason?

Oh, c'mon now, you and I both know that there's plenty of legitimate reasons to shit-talk the US.

Our nation has earned its global reputation; don't be a whiny bitch, own that shit.

Re:Anything that comes out of the UN

[Vaphell]

world food programme? easy target, as it's riddled with nasty unintended consequences

1. people let's say in Africa starve - long story short their environment/tech level can't support that many people. Food from external sources means artificially raised survivability. People multiply, now there are more mouths to feed, and you are back at square 1. Disparity between productivity and needs is even greater which means even greater dependence on external support. Population of Ethiopia (country in more or less perpetual state of famine) grew from 48M to 84M in ~20 years (1990-now).
Feeding Africa is counterproductive: there is a lot of talk how we should reduce global population growth and shit, on the other hand the world subsidizes the very hotspots of rapid unsustainable population growth.

2. dumping free food on developing markets kills any viability of local food producers who can't compete with free/subsidized food from the west. In other words they will be always dirt poor and always dependent on free food because so called humanitarian help takes away their only fishing pole and gives them fish instead. With no way to support from the work of their hands, they will never be able to lay solid foundations for healthy, sustainable economy.

I don't mind disaster relief programs, but perpetual humanitarian help needs to go asap.

Re:Anything that comes out of the UN

[Dishevel]

Cool. So we will just talk about reputations that are earned.
The US. Does not give a shit about anything outside the US.
France
A stuck up surrender Monkey country that can not figure out why guaranteeing jobs for life could be a bad thing.
Germany
Nazi fuckers that want to rule the world and have great need for really freaky sex.
Israel
Bad ass little fuckers that are US puppets.
Saudi Arabia
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Iraq
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Iran
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Afghanistan
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Pakistan
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Syria
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
Egypt
Terrorist bastards that hate women.
UK
Tea sucking bastards that taxed the US in to freedom.
Ireland
Terrorist bastards that hate not drinking.
Scotland
Drinkers that wear dresses.
Russia
Vodka drinkers that sell their women.

Need I go on?
   

Re:Anything that comes out of the UN

[fredprado]

I would be really happy if US didn't give a shit for anything that happens outside it. Unfortunately it is the other way around, it wants to make sure everything that happens outside it goes accordingly to its agenda.

Re:My Plan

[tnk1]

More to the point, it currently *works*. It's not like the system is broken now, it's just that some other people want pieces of the pie. And they could have that, if they wanted it, by building and maintaining their own infrastructure.

However, they don't want to do that. They just want to make money off of, and regulate, what other people built and bought for them.

What will preserve Internet as we know it

[e065c8515d206cb0e190]

is the fact that countries won't ever agree on how to regulate it.

Just like they can't agree on war and peace at the UN.

And thats a Good Thing (tm)

Nationalism, ye gods

[Tenebrousedge]

You're right of course. But instead they've learned to speak English.

Are you entirely sure that's what you want to base your argument on?

So I have a crystal ball that tells me how the rest of this conversation will go. I will introduce many facts detailing exactly how awful US hegemony has been for most of the world. You will bring up the few times this has been positive, but largely rely on nationalistic fervor. The conflation of monologues will end with sentiment to the effect of "Love it or leave it." and other such vaguely ad hominem remarks. We will each leave convinced we have carried the day, and some day far in the future, you or your progeny will be ashamed that, when confronted with evidence of heinous acts, you chose to serve your own tribe and not humanity.