So it has to be a guided projectile then (no, I didn't RTFA;)... which begs the question of what advantage will it actually have over a missile? Speed seems like a likely answer, but a missile system doesn't impose these types of requirements (power generation) on a host vessel....
Not quite the same thing, since it's all powered by a fission reaction...An H-Bomb would be all H and no bomb without a nice chunk of Uranium...Just as well for us, because if the military could churn out nuclear bombs that required no uranium, and produced little fallout, we'd see a hell of a lot more being used.
Uhh, an H-bomb isn't an H-bomb because it uses fission to get the reaction started? Is that actually what you mean to say? Would that likewise mean that atomic bombs (i.e: fission bombs) aren't true atomic bombs because they use conventional explosives to start the process off?
In this case, I'd be surprised if we saw a fusion bomb before a fusion power plant
Umm, we already have them. It doesn't matter how you initiate the fusion reaction -- the point is that we can. Whether or not that's useful for civilian energy production (it's not) is another discussion.....
I think this will be a bit like a naval sniper, aiming to destroy major vessels command center before its even detected, and then leave the area quickly and let the big ships take over.
Uhh, wouldn't that require a line of sight to the intended target? Naval combat within visual range went out of style after Coral Sea. If you don't need a LOS then it would seem to be that this is a guided projectile and you don't exactly need a railgun for that (see harpoon, exocet, etc, etc).
I would suspect that the Naval interest in rail-gun technology is probably aimed at point-defense (i.e: shooting down incoming anti-ship missiles) more then anything else.
I also heard something about some nuke carriers carrying bunker fuel to help keep the destroyers topped off but that seems a bit silly since there are already fleet oilers to perform that task.
Actually, they do, and it's not that foolish when you think about it. Fleet oilers are generally too slow to keep up the battle group and require escorts of their own. The carrier can't entirely replace the fleet oiler but it does add flexibility to the options of the task force commander.
Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that article you linked.
"I was trying to slip the car into neutral but because the car was over-revving and red-lining I couldn't do it."
Assuming it was a manual (most cars in Europe are) what happened to the clutch pedal? And assuming it was an automatic why would it be tough to shift into neutral again? But no matter, because here is the biggest line of BS ever:
"I couldn't turn off the ignition because it would have disabled the power steering and made it even more dangerous."
Really? No power steering is "more dangerous" then tooling down the highway at 130mph with no control over the throttle or brakes? How would he have managed driving a car without power steering? Anybody who has knows that it isn't a whole lot different at speed -- it's low speed stuff where having power steering comes in handy (i.e: parking).
That story sounds pretty fishy to me. The driver in question is either a complete idiot or trying to hide something. I wouldn't place bets either way.
That does sound pretty damn reasonable.... and you know people would totally fall for it. "Yeah, this doesn't look familiar, but it's GPS, so it can't be wrong, right?"
I still can't think of what you could realistically do to harm someone if you pwned their engine control unit or any of the underlying electronics in a car. I suppose you could disable the vehicle quite easily but there are far easier ways to accomplish that (slashed tires come to mind) then trying to do it through electronics.
Israel is committing genocide, and has violated more UN resolutions than any other nation, since the establishment of the General Assembly.
Yes, I never cease to be amazed at the professed intention of Israel to throw the Muslims into the sea. Israel is the nation questioning whether or not they have the right to exist. Israel is the nation that started twowars of aggression against it's neighbors.
Oh, and ignoring UN resolutions? You mean, like this one? Would you fellow General Assembly resolutions if the General Assembly was full of dozens of countries that deny your right to exist and want to push you into the sea?
It also denies full citizenship rights to some, based on ethnicity - despite being indigenous to the region.
Good thing no other country in the region would ever think of denying rights to indigenous peoples. I mean, it's not as though the Kurds are oppressed in Turkey, or the Palestinians are oppressed in Jordan or Egypt. Did you know when Palestine was partitioned that Israel absorbed all of the Jews who found themselves on the wrong side of the line? What did her neighbors do with all of the displaced Arabs? They threw them into refugee camps to keep them disillusioned and disgruntled. Much better to keep your people focused on Israel and the Great Satan then to have them looking at your own human rights abuses.
It was created through acts of terror against the UK.
Ironically enough, so was the United States, if you want to get technical about it.
Don't get me wrong. I'm somewhat annoyed at how one-sided our relationship with Israel actually is. I can't help but remember Israeli acts of espionage against the United States, or the USS Liberty incident. But at the end of the day, we have a lot more in common with Israel then we do with any of her neighbors. Say what you will about her faults (and there are many), but it is a well developed democracy with a market economy, individual freedoms and rule of law. You can nitpick that statement all you want too, but at the end of the day I'd rather live in Israel then any of her neighbors.
Add to that the disturbing new trend of a lot of new junkies in your home town to finance the insurgents - even the ultra-fundamentalist Taliban are happy to sell heroin to buy weapons now.
Sounds like a good reason to legalize drugs and take over the production of them ourselves, doesn't it? You don't hear about the Taliban financing their operations with booze or tobacco do you?
...So drive a 1967 Impala or something like that. "Hack THIS!" 8-)
Even with a modern car there's a limit to how much "hacking" you could do.
Even assuming that you could remotely pwn a car, what would you do with it? The computer controls the engine and MAYBE (in an automatic) the transmission. It doesn't control the steering or brakes. Even if you could floor the throttle using the computer (can you?) the brakes are powerful enough to bring the vehicle to a stop.
Beyond all that, on most cars (maybe not the prius or other 'push-button' start vehicles) I'm guessing that the ignition is not 'fly-by-wire', and turning it off would defeat any pwned engine control unit.
Granted, it's just a movie. Which I haven't actually seen. What happens when her car is 'hacked'? Is it remotely realistic or typical Hollywood?
Like they gathered up the radioisotope thermal generator from Apollo 13's Aquarius lunar lander (currently in the Tonga Trench)?
Yeah, I hear leaving it at 35,700 feet below the sea really drove down the property values there;)
Not that I'm completely dismissive of your point... but seeing as how it hasn't released any of it's 3.9kg of plutonium and it's 35,700 feet below the surface, I don't think it's a great threat.
They'd do things like veto.XXX because Karl Rove promised this as a poltical favour to the Southern Baptist Convention. You know, stuff like that.
Yeah, cuz there were no other arguments against.xxx, it was all Karl Rove. The.xxx TLD is a dumbass idea for a variety of reasons. Like putting the domain registers in charge of policing content. Many in the adult industry are opposed to it because they feel it will regulate their product to an "online ghetto". Many in the religous community are likewise opposed because they think it will "legitimatize" pornography (what, it's somehow more ligitimate if it ends in.xxx instead of.com?). Who defines pornography? Government? ICANN? Network Solutions or Godaddy? It's a completely arbitrary distinction and a pointless TLD to boot.
Bottom line: There are a lot of sound arguments against.xxx. I seriously hope you haven't based your whole case against US control over this one issue.
Ron Paul accepts donations and fundraiser efforts from neo-nazi organizations. Stormfront.com, the leading white supremacist organization online, gave him a bunch of money. When Ron Paul was asked about returning this money, Ron Paul refused.
Hey, I don't like him either, but do you actually have a source to back up those allegations you are making or is it just something that you got in a chain letter e-mail?
Do you also believe that Obama is actually a secret Muslim who refuses to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance? If so, then I have a friend over in Nigeria who needs to move some money out of the country... he'll give you 15% for helping him out.
If not the media, it's the non-voting public that don't value freedom, don't value the Republic, and settle for whatever they get, as long as they don't have to bother to go vote.
Umm, I vote, and I do value the Republic and freedom, I just happen to disagree with Ron Paul. For that "crime" I've been vilified by Ron Paul supporters (both online and local), called everything from a "sheep" to a "fascist".
Newsflash: Just because we don't embrace 100% of the libertarian platform doesn't mean that we don't believe in freedom. Ron Paul is doing us a favor by putting his ideas out there for the public debate but he has zero chance of winning the election. Blame the media for that all you want but at the end of the day one has to ask himself if the American people are really ready to embrace his ideas.
There was a reason why we got away from the gold standard and laissez-faire economics to begin with. I love him for his positions on civil liberties but the 19th century called -- they want their economic policy back.
Can it do anything about the US government and the telcos working hand in hand to wiretap the shit out of the internet
Exactly what would you have ICANN do about this? It's the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. It's most important role is to manage the dns root and address allocations in such a way that the end users don't conflict with each other.
What exactly is ICANN to do if AT&T decides to let the NSA splice into some fiber? Are you going to blame the ITU for wiretapping of the POTS network? Do you really think the United States is the only country that wiretaps on the internet?
I'm probably making your point here, but the counter-argument is that if ICANN is so useless why are people in such an uproar about it? Somebody has to manage the dns root and ip address allocations. Beyond those two functions, pretty much any country that's connected to the internet can do whatever they want with the portions of it inside of their own borders.
Let's assume the US did try and assert authority over the internet. How would it do that exactly?
If you're going to be a fascist fuckwad, at least have the decency to admit it.
How about if you're going to throw around stuff like 'fascist fuckwad' and 'master race' that you have the balls to do it under your real name and not as an anonymous coward?
n reality, it's not, of course: it's responsible to your government, which you really don't have any say in
Really? Last time I checked I get to vote for two of the three branches of the Federal Government. Guess you are one of the cynical people that think voting doesn't matter.
This may explain the lack of outrage more than an enhanced sense of perspective on how pointless it would be to complain about UTC/GMT.
Eh, your probably right (about Americans not being able to find it on a map), but it's still a damn good analogy if I do say so myself.
The Brits got to define the prime meridian because they were the economic/naval power of the period. The United States got some American-only TLDs (.edu,.mil and.gov) because we got the internet going. I really don't see what the fuss is about, other then maybe it annoys a few people that they don't have to type '.us' on the end of these sites. Is it really something worth getting worked up for?
Hey, I'm not a fan of her music either, but for some strange reason that completely escapes me lots of people (not just Americans) listen to that crap. For better or worse she is an undeniable part of American culture. I can't help but recall how when Bill Clinton went to Vietnam to re-establish relations he saw Vietnamese teenagers listening to Britney Spears and wearing blue jeans. Ten years of bombing the crap out of them and they still embraced our culture. I don't understand it but it's hardly a unique story. For some strange reason American culture seems to have enormous appeal.
With regards to Britney Spears though, maybe this thought will make you feel better: It's not as though the United States has monopoly on shitty music;)
It's definitely sad testimony to what we've become in the eyes of the rest of the world
You'll brook no argument from me. It will take us decades to repair the damage that Bush's policies have wrought to our important alliances and friendships across the World. In less then eight years him and his neo-con cronies have managed to destroy 50 years of American foreign policy. 50 years of building cooperative alliances and institutions and now the rest of the World doesn't trust us.
It's not even limited to "Old Europe" either. I find it depressing that a majority of Brits now think that the United States is the biggest threat to World peace. Our most important ally, with whom we share a common culture, history and language.... and the majority of it's citizens no longer trust us. Thanks for that, Bush....
All that said though, the OP still seemed like a pretty cheap potshot. I don't really think Bush cares one way or another about ICANN. It was just an easy way to get a first post and some mod points I think. And I stand by my statements -- ICANN turned loose on the World with no accountability or oversight? Not a good idea....
The United Nations is supposedly meant to be independent from the US
Blame this guy. Little known fact: The original idea behind the UN did not grant veto power to the "big five". The Allies agreed to allow it in order to convince the Soviet Union to join.
but in reality is just a puppet organization held up by the US
Really? Is that why the General Assembly applauded Hugo Chavez after his little tirade? Is that why we can't even stop resolutions like Zionism == racism? Hell, native New Yorker complaint time: Is that why the bastards think they are above local laws that apply to every other American citizen?
Even organizations that aren't based in the US are inevitably tied to the goings-ons of the US from economic, trade, or cultural points of view, such as, say, the Bank of England
And it's our fault that our economy and culture are that successful? Would you have had the same complaints about Great Britain a few decades ago or is it only fashionable to whine about American dominance?
Nobody put a gun to the head of the teenagers of the World and made them listen to Britney Spears, wear blue jeans and drink Starbucks coffee. For whatever reason American culture seems to be popular in parts of the World. I fail to see why we should apologize for that.
And your sense of perspective is leading you to whine about the fact that the United States has a few TLDs for itself? Who the hell cares? That's just a fluke of history. If the UK had gotten the internet going then maybe it would be navy.mil.us instead of navy.mil and royal-navy.mod instead of royal-navy.mod.uk.
You don't see too many Americans whining about the fact that UTC is based on Greenwich Mean Time. The nerve of those Brits to define the Prime Meridian as going through their country. We should change this ASAP.
Need some more tinfoil for that hat? Exactly what does ICANN do that would be useful in "gathering info" on people? Finding out which domains they own and which IP addressing space they have?
You might have had a better point if you had said 'AT&T is a way to gather info on people'. ICANN itself is kind of useless in this regard.
f it's going to be a WORLD WIDE WEB for much longer and not the US tubes, EURAsia tubes, Russia tubes, and China Tubes something has to give now.
And what exactly is the problem with each country asserting control over the internet within it's own borders? That's how the POTS network works. ICANN's role in this scenario is limited to delegating IP addresses and the DNS root in order to avoid conflicts. But what actually happens to the network itself within national borders should be the call of the country involved. Ya know, sovereignty and all that.
ICANN becoming their own international organization with no country has to be one of those things.
And responsible to whom? Themselves? That's a great idea....
Unless the United States is trying to be the Ruler of the World it's time to move to.mil.us and.gov.us like everyone else.
Yes, because in the grand scheme of things with everything that's going on in the World, ranging from the War in Iraq to the Genocide in Darfur, the fact that the United States has global TLDs not ending in.us is really a priority that the World community needs to address.
Slashdot Mirror
So it has to be a guided projectile then (no, I didn't RTFA ;)... which begs the question of what advantage will it actually have over a missile? Speed seems like a likely answer, but a missile system doesn't impose these types of requirements (power generation) on a host vessel....
Uhh, an H-bomb isn't an H-bomb because it uses fission to get the reaction started? Is that actually what you mean to say? Would that likewise mean that atomic bombs (i.e: fission bombs) aren't true atomic bombs because they use conventional explosives to start the process off?
In this case, I'd be surprised if we saw a fusion bomb before a fusion power plantUmm, we already have them. It doesn't matter how you initiate the fusion reaction -- the point is that we can. Whether or not that's useful for civilian energy production (it's not) is another discussion.....
Uhh, wouldn't that require a line of sight to the intended target? Naval combat within visual range went out of style after Coral Sea. If you don't need a LOS then it would seem to be that this is a guided projectile and you don't exactly need a railgun for that (see harpoon, exocet, etc, etc).
I would suspect that the Naval interest in rail-gun technology is probably aimed at point-defense (i.e: shooting down incoming anti-ship missiles) more then anything else.
Actually, they do, and it's not that foolish when you think about it. Fleet oilers are generally too slow to keep up the battle group and require escorts of their own. The carrier can't entirely replace the fleet oiler but it does add flexibility to the options of the task force commander.
And your point is what exactly? That this Rabbi has fairly extreme views?
How is his opinion any more relevant then Pat Robertson's or Jerry Falwell's? Is it the stated policy of the Israeli Government?
Sorry, but I'm calling bullshit on that article you linked.
"I was trying to slip the car into neutral but because the car was over-revving and red-lining I couldn't do it."Assuming it was a manual (most cars in Europe are) what happened to the clutch pedal? And assuming it was an automatic why would it be tough to shift into neutral again? But no matter, because here is the biggest line of BS ever:
"I couldn't turn off the ignition because it would have disabled the power steering and made it even more dangerous."Really? No power steering is "more dangerous" then tooling down the highway at 130mph with no control over the throttle or brakes? How would he have managed driving a car without power steering? Anybody who has knows that it isn't a whole lot different at speed -- it's low speed stuff where having power steering comes in handy (i.e: parking).
That story sounds pretty fishy to me. The driver in question is either a complete idiot or trying to hide something. I wouldn't place bets either way.
That does sound pretty damn reasonable.... and you know people would totally fall for it. "Yeah, this doesn't look familiar, but it's GPS, so it can't be wrong, right?"
I still can't think of what you could realistically do to harm someone if you pwned their engine control unit or any of the underlying electronics in a car. I suppose you could disable the vehicle quite easily but there are far easier ways to accomplish that (slashed tires come to mind) then trying to do it through electronics.
Yes, I never cease to be amazed at the professed intention of Israel to throw the Muslims into the sea. Israel is the nation questioning whether or not they have the right to exist. Israel is the nation that started two wars of aggression against it's neighbors.
Oh, and ignoring UN resolutions? You mean, like this one? Would you fellow General Assembly resolutions if the General Assembly was full of dozens of countries that deny your right to exist and want to push you into the sea?
It also denies full citizenship rights to some, based on ethnicity - despite being indigenous to the region.Good thing no other country in the region would ever think of denying rights to indigenous peoples. I mean, it's not as though the Kurds are oppressed in Turkey, or the Palestinians are oppressed in Jordan or Egypt. Did you know when Palestine was partitioned that Israel absorbed all of the Jews who found themselves on the wrong side of the line? What did her neighbors do with all of the displaced Arabs? They threw them into refugee camps to keep them disillusioned and disgruntled. Much better to keep your people focused on Israel and the Great Satan then to have them looking at your own human rights abuses.
It was created through acts of terror against the UK.Ironically enough, so was the United States, if you want to get technical about it.
Don't get me wrong. I'm somewhat annoyed at how one-sided our relationship with Israel actually is. I can't help but remember Israeli acts of espionage against the United States, or the USS Liberty incident. But at the end of the day, we have a lot more in common with Israel then we do with any of her neighbors. Say what you will about her faults (and there are many), but it is a well developed democracy with a market economy, individual freedoms and rule of law. You can nitpick that statement all you want too, but at the end of the day I'd rather live in Israel then any of her neighbors.
Sounds like a good reason to legalize drugs and take over the production of them ourselves, doesn't it? You don't hear about the Taliban financing their operations with booze or tobacco do you?
...So drive a 1967 Impala or something like that. "Hack THIS!" 8-)Even with a modern car there's a limit to how much "hacking" you could do.
Even assuming that you could remotely pwn a car, what would you do with it? The computer controls the engine and MAYBE (in an automatic) the transmission. It doesn't control the steering or brakes. Even if you could floor the throttle using the computer (can you?) the brakes are powerful enough to bring the vehicle to a stop.
Beyond all that, on most cars (maybe not the prius or other 'push-button' start vehicles) I'm guessing that the ignition is not 'fly-by-wire', and turning it off would defeat any pwned engine control unit.
Granted, it's just a movie. Which I haven't actually seen. What happens when her car is 'hacked'? Is it remotely realistic or typical Hollywood?
Yeah, I hear leaving it at 35,700 feet below the sea really drove down the property values there ;)
Not that I'm completely dismissive of your point... but seeing as how it hasn't released any of it's 3.9kg of plutonium and it's 35,700 feet below the surface, I don't think it's a great threat.
Sure it does. One of the ships in the convey was a car carrier.
You'd think I have to come up with all of the original ideas around here? ;) *duck*
Yeah, cuz there were no other arguments against .xxx, it was all Karl Rove. The .xxx TLD is a dumbass idea for a variety of reasons. Like putting the domain registers in charge of policing content. Many in the adult industry are opposed to it because they feel it will regulate their product to an "online ghetto". Many in the religous community are likewise opposed because they think it will "legitimatize" pornography (what, it's somehow more ligitimate if it ends in .xxx instead of .com?). Who defines pornography? Government? ICANN? Network Solutions or Godaddy? It's a completely arbitrary distinction and a pointless TLD to boot.
Bottom line: There are a lot of sound arguments against .xxx. I seriously hope you haven't based your whole case against US control over this one issue.
Hey, I don't like him either, but do you actually have a source to back up those allegations you are making or is it just something that you got in a chain letter e-mail?
Do you also believe that Obama is actually a secret Muslim who refuses to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance? If so, then I have a friend over in Nigeria who needs to move some money out of the country... he'll give you 15% for helping him out.
Umm, I vote, and I do value the Republic and freedom, I just happen to disagree with Ron Paul. For that "crime" I've been vilified by Ron Paul supporters (both online and local), called everything from a "sheep" to a "fascist".
Newsflash: Just because we don't embrace 100% of the libertarian platform doesn't mean that we don't believe in freedom. Ron Paul is doing us a favor by putting his ideas out there for the public debate but he has zero chance of winning the election. Blame the media for that all you want but at the end of the day one has to ask himself if the American people are really ready to embrace his ideas.
There was a reason why we got away from the gold standard and laissez-faire economics to begin with. I love him for his positions on civil liberties but the 19th century called -- they want their economic policy back.
Exactly what would you have ICANN do about this? It's the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. It's most important role is to manage the dns root and address allocations in such a way that the end users don't conflict with each other.
What exactly is ICANN to do if AT&T decides to let the NSA splice into some fiber? Are you going to blame the ITU for wiretapping of the POTS network? Do you really think the United States is the only country that wiretaps on the internet?
I'm probably making your point here, but the counter-argument is that if ICANN is so useless why are people in such an uproar about it? Somebody has to manage the dns root and ip address allocations. Beyond those two functions, pretty much any country that's connected to the internet can do whatever they want with the portions of it inside of their own borders.
Let's assume the US did try and assert authority over the internet. How would it do that exactly?
How about if you're going to throw around stuff like 'fascist fuckwad' and 'master race' that you have the balls to do it under your real name and not as an anonymous coward?
n reality, it's not, of course: it's responsible to your government, which you really don't have any say inReally? Last time I checked I get to vote for two of the three branches of the Federal Government. Guess you are one of the cynical people that think voting doesn't matter.
Eh, your probably right (about Americans not being able to find it on a map), but it's still a damn good analogy if I do say so myself.
The Brits got to define the prime meridian because they were the economic/naval power of the period. The United States got some American-only TLDs (.edu, .mil and .gov) because we got the internet going. I really don't see what the fuss is about, other then maybe it annoys a few people that they don't have to type '.us' on the end of these sites. Is it really something worth getting worked up for?
Hey, I'm not a fan of her music either, but for some strange reason that completely escapes me lots of people (not just Americans) listen to that crap. For better or worse she is an undeniable part of American culture. I can't help but recall how when Bill Clinton went to Vietnam to re-establish relations he saw Vietnamese teenagers listening to Britney Spears and wearing blue jeans. Ten years of bombing the crap out of them and they still embraced our culture. I don't understand it but it's hardly a unique story. For some strange reason American culture seems to have enormous appeal.
With regards to Britney Spears though, maybe this thought will make you feel better: It's not as though the United States has monopoly on shitty music ;)
You'll brook no argument from me. It will take us decades to repair the damage that Bush's policies have wrought to our important alliances and friendships across the World. In less then eight years him and his neo-con cronies have managed to destroy 50 years of American foreign policy. 50 years of building cooperative alliances and institutions and now the rest of the World doesn't trust us.
It's not even limited to "Old Europe" either. I find it depressing that a majority of Brits now think that the United States is the biggest threat to World peace. Our most important ally, with whom we share a common culture, history and language.... and the majority of it's citizens no longer trust us. Thanks for that, Bush....
All that said though, the OP still seemed like a pretty cheap potshot. I don't really think Bush cares one way or another about ICANN. It was just an easy way to get a first post and some mod points I think. And I stand by my statements -- ICANN turned loose on the World with no accountability or oversight? Not a good idea....
Blame this guy. Little known fact: The original idea behind the UN did not grant veto power to the "big five". The Allies agreed to allow it in order to convince the Soviet Union to join.
but in reality is just a puppet organization held up by the USReally? Is that why the General Assembly applauded Hugo Chavez after his little tirade? Is that why we can't even stop resolutions like Zionism == racism? Hell, native New Yorker complaint time: Is that why the bastards think they are above local laws that apply to every other American citizen?
Even organizations that aren't based in the US are inevitably tied to the goings-ons of the US from economic, trade, or cultural points of view, such as, say, the Bank of EnglandAnd it's our fault that our economy and culture are that successful? Would you have had the same complaints about Great Britain a few decades ago or is it only fashionable to whine about American dominance?
Nobody put a gun to the head of the teenagers of the World and made them listen to Britney Spears, wear blue jeans and drink Starbucks coffee. For whatever reason American culture seems to be popular in parts of the World. I fail to see why we should apologize for that.
And your sense of perspective is leading you to whine about the fact that the United States has a few TLDs for itself? Who the hell cares? That's just a fluke of history. If the UK had gotten the internet going then maybe it would be navy.mil.us instead of navy.mil and royal-navy.mod instead of royal-navy.mod.uk.
You don't see too many Americans whining about the fact that UTC is based on Greenwich Mean Time. The nerve of those Brits to define the Prime Meridian as going through their country. We should change this ASAP.
Need some more tinfoil for that hat? Exactly what does ICANN do that would be useful in "gathering info" on people? Finding out which domains they own and which IP addressing space they have?
You might have had a better point if you had said 'AT&T is a way to gather info on people'. ICANN itself is kind of useless in this regard.
And what exactly is the problem with each country asserting control over the internet within it's own borders? That's how the POTS network works. ICANN's role in this scenario is limited to delegating IP addresses and the DNS root in order to avoid conflicts. But what actually happens to the network itself within national borders should be the call of the country involved. Ya know, sovereignty and all that.
ICANN becoming their own international organization with no country has to be one of those things.And responsible to whom? Themselves? That's a great idea....
Yes, because in the grand scheme of things with everything that's going on in the World, ranging from the War in Iraq to the Genocide in Darfur, the fact that the United States has global TLDs not ending in .us is really a priority that the World community needs to address.