ICANN's Ex CEO Fronts Chinese Initiative On Running the Internet (theregister.co.uk)

Earthquake Retrofit points out this story at the Register which discusses what could be some big changes for the future of the internet. "On the last day of the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen, the conference organizers unexpectedly announced they had set up a new 'high-level advisory committee' that would guide the agenda of future conferences and 'contribute ideas for the development of the Internet.' The committee has already had its first meeting, the organizers stated, naming ICANN's Fadi Chehade and Alibaba CEO Jack Ma as its founders and noting that it had 'invited 31 leading Internet figures from governments, enterprises, academic institutions, and technological communities to be members of the first high-level advisory committee.' Those 'figures' have not been named but we understand they include government representatives from a number of authoritarian governments, including Russia, and do not include lead names from the internet community."

Comments

And so it ends.

[rbmorse]

But it was a good run while it lasted.

My only comment is...

[QuietLagoon]

... I have to wonder why it took so long for something like this to occur.

.
Governments are accustomed to taking control of things. Authoritative governments even more so.

The Internet is now in a proxy war for ownership according to the "land-grab" rules of authoritative regimes --- if you can grab it, it is yours.

it's inevitable!

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the thing. There are three forces conspiring to centralize control of the internet:

(1) Major governments, who don't like that anyone could say anything on it.
(2) Major corporations.
(3) The general public, who has been complicit in moving all their communications away from decentralized, open, and uncensored protocols onto proprietary, centralized, and censored ones.

Arrayed against that are a motley crew of mostly old timers who remember what the net was like when it was free and open. But those people are dying off, giving up, or just plain deciding the fight isn't worth it when most people are working against them by using FB and the like.

This is a fight that can only be lost. It might be different if the general public would stand up and act against centralization of control, but they do just the opposite. They prefer Facebook to email. Closed IM services to open ones where anyone can run a node.

What was once the freest global means of communication ever invented by humans, something that might have given freedom to the world, will become the most Orwellian. Oh, it'll all be fine if you want Facebook-style control of everything you do, see, say, and read on your locked down tablet. That kind of "freedom" will never be taken away.

It's already under way. Another 25 years and we should be almost all the way there, with the people who want a free internet shoved to the fringes when nothing works for them any more.

Re:I can't believe some comments.

[SuricouRaven]

Who the internet 'should' be managed by doesn't matter, because the internet is composed of hardware, and the hardware exists within the jurisdiction of various countries. The UN can say whatever they want - but if some country passes a law mandating censorship, and has the power to compel equipment operators to comply under threat of criminal prosecution, then censorship will occur within the borders of that country.

Not really a theory

[rsilvergun]

you hit nail on head. It's not so much about racism as it is about having an underclass to look down on. I remember finding this out in a college history course. Slavery was important to the south because poor white southerners were kept in check by comparing their living conditions to black slaves. It's something every culture does: People don't measure your quality of life objectively. For most people it's subjective. This is also why India has a cast system and Britain a Class system. I'm sure I could find other examples without too much effort.

It's not some grand conspiracy per se, it's just that if you're a member of the 1% you need strategies to control the other 99%. This is one of the most effective. If a ruling class didn't come up with stuff like this it doesn't stay a ruling class for very long. Survival bias sets in and you start seeing the same patterns emerging. It's all pretty well known to Historians but it's not as cool or sexy as talking about wars so you're lucky if you get a paragraph devoted to it. Plus these days talking about it gets you shouted down as a politically correct feminazi or some such. Another thing the ruling class is good at is recognizing threats...