Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/1/2005 6:12:18 AM EDT
Yee haa! We win one over the world socialists.
===================================================================
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4296646.stm

BBC NEWS
US rejects changes to net control
The US has rejected calls by European Union (EU) officials to give control of the net over to a more representative United Nations (UN) body.

Wrangling over who should essentially be the net police, managing domain names and net traffic routing fairly, has been going on for some time.

The matter is supposed to be discussed at November's World Summit on the Information Society in Tunisia.

But at a pre-Summit meeting this week, the US said it would resist the plans.

In the meeting, the European Union (EU) backed proposals that control of the net should be under a more representative body.

"We will not agree to the UN taking over the management of the internet," said Ambassador David Gross, the US coordinator for international communications and information policy at the State Department.

"Some countries want that. We think that's unacceptable."

Fairer sharing

Currently, the US Commerce Department approves any changes to the internet's core addressing systems, the root zone files, managed by Icann (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers).

Last month the UN's Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) published its proposals for reform of the way the net is run, which are to be debated at the Summit.

Governance over the net - the management of its addressing systems and traffic routing - has historically been the role of the US because it largely funded and pushed its early development.

The US argues that UN proposals would shift the regulatory approach from private sector leadership to government, top-down control.

Icann administers domain name and addressing systems, such as country domain suffixes. It manages how net browsers and e-mail programs direct traffic.

But many countries, particuarly developing nations, have been calling for the US to relinquish control, or at least to come up with a compromise, to ensure the net is managed more equitably.

Many outside the US argue that no one country should have authority over something that plays such a key role in the global economy.

As many developing countries seek to exploit the net for economic and social development, the issue has become more pressing.

The UN's WGIG has suggested four alternatives:

* Option One - create a UN body known as the Global Internet Council that draws its members from governments and "other stakeholders" and takes over the US oversight role of Icann.

* Option Two - no changes apart from strengthening Icann's Governmental Advisory Committee to become a forum for official debate on net issues.

* Option Three - relegate Icann to a narrow technical role and set up an International Internet Council that sits outside the UN. US loses oversight of Icann

* Option Four - create three new bodies. One to take over from Icann and look after the net's addressing system. One to be a debating chamber for governments, businesses and the public; and one to co-ordinate work on "internet-related public policy issues".

The UN World Summit on the Information Society takes place in Tunis, Tunisia, between 16 and 18 November.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/technology/4296646.stm

Published: 2005/09/30 10:14:05 GMT

© BBC MMV
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:21:27 AM EDT
let the un invent it's own internet first.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:23:07 AM EDT
Well, the UN has managed to screw up everything else it has taken charge of.... that is one good reason not to let them touch the internet.

Then they would tax the heck out of US users... all in the name of "fairness", and redistributing the world's wealth to those in need.

And all this would be decided by some lowlife nephew of an African dictator who would find new and creative ways to line his pockets. Most likely a Nigerian.

No, we'll pass. F--- you very much.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:23:47 AM EDT
Fuck the UN. We invented it (well, Al Gore did) and we are keeping it.


Why don't they move that socialistic leech institution to France?

Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:25:14 AM EDT

Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:28:42 AM EDT
if the UN were incharge of the internet it would be full of kiddie porn and muslim/ terrorist exicutions of westerners, all legal of-course and any information that proves global warming and american conspiracy to dominate the world would be the only thing you would find on the net.

F*CK THE [un]
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:29:34 AM EDT
if it ain't broke don't fix it.

leave the internet alone while it still works.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:30:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:30:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Well, the UN has managed to screw up everything else it has taken charge of.... that is one good reason not to let them touch the internet.

Then they would tax the heck out of US users... all in the name of "fairness", and redistributing the world's wealth to those in need.

And all this would be decided by some lowlife nephew of an African dictator who would find new and creative ways to line his pockets. Most likely a Nigerian.

No, we'll pass. F--- you very much.



I'm more concerned about China or Cuba winding up as leader of the "UN Internet Commission" or what-the-hell-ever, and imposing their brand of censorship on the entire world without recourse. I'd think that would be grounds to run the UN out of New York at bayonet point.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:33:12 AM EDT

"Today, on FOX, our investigation into the UN's sex for bandwidth scandal continues."
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:37:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/1/2005 6:39:47 AM EDT by raven]
When I was a tour guide a long time ago, some New Zealand tourists complained thye couldn't understand what I was saying because of my accent (I talk like pretty much all Americans, they had the problem). They actually expressed this to me, about 40 people, and they all agreeed. My accent(?) was too much for them.

So I gave my tour in a mock BBC accent, they fucking loved it. It started out as a joke, but they knew what I was doing. Or trying.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 5:28:36 PM EDT
FU*K The UN
FU*K The BBC
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 5:36:17 PM EDT
I'm curious as to what slug-minded mouthbreathing socialist fucker actually thought that we would willingly and/or gladly give up the reins to what is probably the most powerful tool currently available in the entire world, especially to a bunch of nepotist childhumping communist bastards who would rather see us rot in our own shit.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 5:37:12 PM EDT
The United States' response to the European Union request can be seen here:

www.theEUcanblowme.com
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:01:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:04:17 PM EDT
What has the UN done for us?
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:05:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
I'm curious as to what slug-minded mouthbreathing socialist fucker actually thought that we would willingly and/or gladly give up the reins to what is probably the most powerful tool currently available in the entire world, especially to a bunch of nepotist childhumping communist bastards who would rather see us rot in our own shit.



+1 Well put.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:05:24 PM EDT
It works as is, and I don't see any particular need to have China or Libya or Russia get their mits on anything to do with the root name servers. If they don't like it they can set up their own root name servers and persuade everyone in the universe to point their DNS config files at 'em.
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:07:18 PM EDT
whats Al Gore's opinion? (well, since he invented it)

Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:08:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/1/2005 6:10:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/1/2005 6:10:42 PM EDT by kc0iwx]
Every time I think the UN can't get worse, I read about them again, and think "It got worse. How IS that possible?"
Top Top