Slashdot Mirror
Commerce Secretary: US Wants Multi-Stakeholder Process To Preserve Internet
Ted_Margaris_Chicago writes The United States will resist all efforts to give "any person, entity or nation" control of the Internet rather than the "global multi-stakeholder communities," said Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker in a Oct. 13 speech. "Next week, at the International Telecommunication Union Conference in Korea, we will see proposals to put governments in charge of Internet governance. You can rest assured that the United States will oppose these efforts at every turn," she said in prepared remarks to an Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, meeting in Los Angeles.
Build you're own internet.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Let's see how the practice turns out. Part of a "free, open" internet is making sure that no one can monopolize the pipe. Government isn't the only evil here. There is plenty of private interest in balkanization. In fact most government regulation is for their benefit.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
... or keep. The internet is a network of networks. Any country only controls the parts on its own soil.
With this administration - " the United States will oppose these efforts at every turn" , means just the opposite and we are totally fucked...
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
The US are actively preventing a free and open internet in the name of copyright, and of spying on everyone else on the fucking planet.
Fuck you America, you're so full of shit it isn't funny.
The land of the closely-monitored, and the home of the scared.
Hypocritical douchebag of a country if there ever was.
so far, just smoke with a cracked mirror
So how many of these countries have already sharded the internet behind their government firewalls, i.e. China/Russia? And we believe that all other governments are less corrupt and self serving than the US? I'm not a fan of the US Panopticon and stranglehold on critical infrastructure, but honestly, it's worked for several decades now why break it up? At least the US influence that conforms with the military influence we already have. It would be great if a multinational panacea existed to control it, but the closest thing we have to that today is the UN. It doesn't have a strong track record for being the most effective governing body out there. Corruption and government go hand-in-hand; one feeds the other.
Continued United States government control
over the Internet is the worst possible scenario,
EXCEPT FOR ALL THE OTHERS.
(Apologies to Winston Churchill)
Commerce Secretary : I don't know what I'm doing.
Freedom to monitor the masses is the most important freedom.
This is a bad idea because the stakeholders have the monetary wealth to exert influence over the internet and thus causing even more problems. It must remain regulated by a neutral, objective third party that cannot be co-opted by money, power, or influence - or, at least, not any more than it already has.
well, not quite. any country can to a point control how other parts seem when viewed from their land.
however, it seems that US supporting multi stake is more like US opposing a new more level multi stake arrangement through some other entitity(un is a multi stake entity for example). US would rather that all the stakes are US stakes..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
The US wants complete control of the Interwebs. Period.
The United States will resist all efforts to give "any person, entity or nation"
other than the US, that is. Because we think our laws are applicable world-wide, our jurisdiction covers Earth and we invented the damn thing (ignore that this is only partially true) so get on your knees and thank us.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
From the take down on domain level, to the global spying it surely worked. For the USA that it is it worked fine. Not that much for other countries.
"The United States will resist all efforts to give "any person, entity or nation" control of the Internet"
Unless the Holy Copyright or Holy Patents are at stake of course. Then the US will (ab)use all its power to force their wiew down everyone's throat.
Wouldn't surprise me if the so called "global multi-stakeholder communities" becomes the means to introduce all kinds of sensorships on human expression.
A similar thing like sensorship is apparently already in place with online newspapers, who can, will and have deleted comments on their website without justification or any explanation.
How about us individuals take it away from government.
The US has its own internet. It's called: The Internet.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
US obviously can't do it without abusing the power / slurping anyone and everyone's data because "national security". I welcome cooperation among nations over isolation. We are one race - time to start acting like it.
It seems like most of the time news stories talk about "control over The Internet," they're talking about one of three things: .com and other tlds.
1) Control over DNS, specifically who gets
2) The ability to knock a site they don't like offline so no one can use it.
3) Strong surveillance over all traffic that (usually) crosses their borders or is entirely within those borders.