US fights for control over the internet ! (1 Viewer)

[zahid]

Net power struggle nears climax
By Alfred Hermida
Technology editor, BBC News website

-----Ouote from BBC---------------------

It is seen as arrogant and determined to remain the sheriff of the world wide web, regardless of whatever the rest of the world may think.

It has even lost the support of the European Union. It stands alone as the divisive battle over who runs the internet heads for a showdown at a key UN summit in Tunisia next month.

The stakes are high, with the European Commissioner responsible for the net, Viviane Reding, warning of a potential web meltdown.

"The US is absolutely isolated and that is dangerous," she said during a briefing with journalists in London.

"Imagine the Brazilians or the Chinese doing their own internet. That would be the end of the story.

"I am very much afraid of a fragmented internet if there is no agreement."

Brokering the peace

The UN has been wrestling over who should run the internet for a number of years. It was one of the issues which divided nations at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva two years ago.

The second phase of the UN conference is due to take place in Tunisia from the 16 to 18 November.

Currently a California-based group called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) is the nearest thing to a ruling body.

The private company was set up by the US Department of Commerce to oversee the domain name and addressing systems, such as country domain suffixes. It manages how net browsers and e-mail programs direct traffic.

Icann was to gain its independence from the Department of Commerce by September 2006. But in July the US said it would "maintain its historic role in authorising changes or modifications to the authoritative root zone file".

America's determination to remain the ultimate purveyor of the internet has angered other countries which believe it is time to come up with a new way of regulating the digital traffic of the 21st century.

In the face of opposition from countries such as China, Iran and Brazil, and several African nations, the US is now isolated ahead of November's UN summit.

The row threatens to overshadow talks on other issues such as bringing more people online and tackling spam e-mail.

Global forum

America's traditional ally, Europe, has been left trying to find a way of brokering the peace.

"There is a problem as many parts of the world don't like the fact that one country is linked to the organism that technically rules the internet," said Commissioner Reding. "Many countries would like a multilateral approach."

On the table are European proposals for some kind of international forum to discuss principles for running the internet.

The EU does not intend to scrap Icann. It would continue in its current technical role.

Instead Europe is suggesting a way of allowing countries to express their position on internet issues, though the details on how this would happen are vague.

"We have no intention to regulate the internet," said Commissioner Reding, reassuring the US that the EU was not proposing setting up a new global body.

Rather she talked of a "model of cooperation", of an international forum to discuss the internet.

Her carefully chosen form of words may help assuage a Bush administration which is vehemently opposed to any kind of international body to govern the internet.

"I am sure we will find a solution in interests of the internet," said Mrs Reding. "We think we could have an agreement on what's on the table."

The US has got an image problem when it comes to the internet.

---------------End Quote--------------------------

Very interesting...they want to control the world...now they want to control the internet too.

 

[withoutaface]

Well they did invent it. And keep in mind that it's a private company controlling it, not the US govt.

 

[hiphophorray123]

Net power struggle nears climax
By Alfred Hermida
Technology editor, BBC News website

-----Ouote from BBC---------------------

It is seen as arrogant and determined to remain the sheriff of the world wide web, regardless of whatever the rest of the world may think.

It has even lost the support of the European Union. It stands alone as the divisive battle over who runs the internet heads for a showdown at a key UN summit in Tunisia next month.

The stakes are high, with the European Commissioner responsible for the net, Viviane Reding, warning of a potential web meltdown.

"The US is absolutely isolated and that is dangerous," she said during a briefing with journalists in London.

"Imagine the Brazilians or the Chinese doing their own internet. That would be the end of the story.

"I am very much afraid of a fragmented internet if there is no agreement."

Brokering the peace

The UN has been wrestling over who should run the internet for a number of years. It was one of the issues which divided nations at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva two years ago.

The second phase of the UN conference is due to take place in Tunisia from the 16 to 18 November.

Currently a California-based group called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) is the nearest thing to a ruling body.

The private company was set up by the US Department of Commerce to oversee the domain name and addressing systems, such as country domain suffixes. It manages how net browsers and e-mail programs direct traffic.

Icann was to gain its independence from the Department of Commerce by September 2006. But in July the US said it would "maintain its historic role in authorising changes or modifications to the authoritative root zone file".

America's determination to remain the ultimate purveyor of the internet has angered other countries which believe it is time to come up with a new way of regulating the digital traffic of the 21st century.

In the face of opposition from countries such as China, Iran and Brazil, and several African nations, the US is now isolated ahead of November's UN summit.

The row threatens to overshadow talks on other issues such as bringing more people online and tackling spam e-mail.

Global forum

America's traditional ally, Europe, has been left trying to find a way of brokering the peace.

"There is a problem as many parts of the world don't like the fact that one country is linked to the organism that technically rules the internet," said Commissioner Reding. "Many countries would like a multilateral approach."

On the table are European proposals for some kind of international forum to discuss principles for running the internet.

The EU does not intend to scrap Icann. It would continue in its current technical role.

Instead Europe is suggesting a way of allowing countries to express their position on internet issues, though the details on how this would happen are vague.

"We have no intention to regulate the internet," said Commissioner Reding, reassuring the US that the EU was not proposing setting up a new global body.

Rather she talked of a "model of cooperation", of an international forum to discuss the internet.

Her carefully chosen form of words may help assuage a Bush administration which is vehemently opposed to any kind of international body to govern the internet.

"I am sure we will find a solution in interests of the internet," said Mrs Reding. "We think we could have an agreement on what's on the table."

The US has got an image problem when it comes to the internet.

---------------End Quote--------------------------

Very interesting...they want to control the world...now they want to control the internet too.

well, you know what to do...zahid

 

[Rafy]

just another reason to hate America and its government.
Its a reflection of their arrogant and ecocentric attitude to foreign relations.
They Just have to realise that the Internet is now a global entity, and as such should be governed by a global organisation. There is too much at stake to simply allow a single state to control something so vital to the global economy and world communications.

I favour a United Nations sponsored governing body to regulate the internet. Another problem that arrises here is the question of International Law. The Internet transcends borders and jurasdictions, so a co-ordinated UN sponsored international convention governing the internet needs to be established. Its the only way to really stop e-problems like piracy and copyright infringments etc...

 

[loquasagacious]

Why regulate the internet at all?

 

[Iron]

This is the age of Information. Small cataclysmic events are happening all the time at the speed of light. The Internet allows anyone anywhere to access information that might be true, might be false, but you can find whatever information you need to prosecute any argument you want. Conspiracy theories abound. History can be written any way you wish. In the past, information bound culture. There was a shared sense of a gradually expanding library of sensible and responsible scholarship whereas now information is serving more to fracture culture. The future of information is with bloggers. And who knows what the blogging implications might be of a generation aching for the steely coldness of Grand Theft Auto San Andreus and other games involving cyber murder, cyber torture and on line sex and anonymous chat rooms and bomb-making instructions and clubs dedicated to nihilism and terrorism and all manner of misguided madnesses designed to accelerate Rapture.

I think some controls on false/inflammatory/perverted information are sorely needed.
Maybe hand it over to a independent commission with clear rules on what they can filter (not that there's any capacity to do this)

edit: didnt intend to diss you addymac

 

[zahid]

well, you know what to do...zahid

How the hell can i blow up the internet...its not like its bali.

 

[Rorix]

I think we should turn it over to the UN, because the US has been doing such a bad job.

That way we can ensure we have multilateral action whenever the internet goes down.

 

[Generator]

And, if Unicef is true to form, they could create an X-rated smurfs episode to highlight the plight of kids being exposed to internet pornography.


Edit: Oh, yes, I nearly forgot... Down with Bush! He so dumb, dumb lyk my cat on heat, LOL!

 

[loquasagacious]

No offence taken Iron - I was intending on stimulating some discussion....

I will admit that from the outset I am prone to discredit Doyle simply because he threatens that the internet is causing moral degredation and hastening rapture........

Oh and as a note doesn't this seem to get pretty close to one of the tutes we did in POLS1002 last sem?

 

[Iron]

Yeah I was thinking that too. The more you know, the less you know. In conversations or in the papers, you're more inclined to be open to new ideas/challenge existing ones etc, as opposed to reinforcing half-baked ideas on mathmite's white power forums.

 

[loquasagacious]

Or worse still kangaroos messages from Mary forums....

I think the more you know less you know aspect is unavoidable in any media, and indeed in society generally. I do not believe that it or the associated issues in relation to the internet alone justify a great deal of regulation. I would support very little in the way of regulation beyond what already exists and the existing regulation does not combat this.

In my view the only way to abate this danger is through the teaching of critical thinking/source analysis in schools as a way of innoculating against taking as fact the rants of the misguided and ill informed....

 

[Iron]

I did like Doyle's points about how information once bound culture, but now it fractures it - because commercialising the news makes for tabloids/inflammatory opinionated dickhead (which sell).

But he makes a more pressing point about the internet and I think his attack on the cyber freak show ("cyber murder, cyber torture and on line sex and anonymous chat rooms and bomb-making instructions and clubs dedicated to nihilism and terrorism and all manner of misguided madnesses") needs to be addressed - as evil as I believe censorship to be.

He doesnt apply these dangers so much to us (as we're so great and educated), but the freakish generation after us.... Just as an aside, have there been any new crop in ncap from the past year apart from anti-mathmite, kangaroo (which I dont alsways mind as he/she's serious) and supercharged? All i see is an exodus/fading of wise old members and women.

Brave new world

 

[loquasagacious]

I think Doyle's diatribe against the freakish underbelly of the internet is largely a reactionary knee jerk to the internet. Afterall BoS almost fits in under anonymous chatroom, I daresay that many (cough NS and LR) have engaged in 'online sex', far more accessed porn. I personally have accessed bomb making instructions.

The internet is what we make it. I agree that a large part of it is indeed a cyber freak show, however it is our cyber freak show. We made it that way, say what you will about the internet but its hard to force people to do things on it, people choose to. 20% of the internet is porn because huge swathes of the population demand it.

The internet is in so many ways us - we are on here talking politics because politics is something we find interesting. Was NCAP shut down we wouldn't stop being interested in politics. Ultimately we can censor the internet no more than we can censor ourselves.

..........................

Maybe we should create some kind of NCAP honour roll anoiting the up and coming whilst commemorating the departed?

I miss asqy and neo, even ntb and moonlight arn't posting much anymore. : a minutes silence :

 

[Iron]

It's hard to say whether people demand porn and bomb making instructions - or whether it's widely known that the internet contains these things and that accessing it is apart of the experience.

I know im getting on a moral high horse (side saddling anyway), but I wonder how many relationships have been ruined by the wide/renound/often pre-emptive advent of internet porn? Would've those two Germans (one with fetish for having penis eaten alive, another with cannabalistic fetish) ever met, without perverted cyber rooms?

But I agree with you. For forums like this one, there;s a lot to be said for self-regulation. Mods are around, and BoS rules are pretty good.

 

[Xayma]

It's a pity for China that the USA is doing such a poor job. Letting all those websites containing the word "democracy" get through

 

[Rorix]

Maybe we should create some kind of NCAP honour roll anoiting the up and coming whilst commemorating the departed?

I miss asqy and neo, even ntb and moonlight arn't posting much anymore. : a minutes silence :

And let us never forget the mighty GWB, banned after a deadly clash with a lesbian.


No-one decent posts anymore because the forum population sucks.

 

[withoutaface]

I think Doyle's diatribe against the freakish underbelly of the internet is largely a reactionary knee jerk to the internet. Afterall BoS almost fits in under anonymous chatroom, I daresay that many (cough NS and LR) have engaged in 'online sex', far more accessed porn. I personally have accessed bomb making instructions.

The internet is what we make it. I agree that a large part of it is indeed a cyber freak show, however it is our cyber freak show. We made it that way, say what you will about the internet but its hard to force people to do things on it, people choose to. 20% of the internet is porn because huge swathes of the population demand it.

The internet is in so many ways us - we are on here talking politics because politics is something we find interesting. Was NCAP shut down we wouldn't stop being interested in politics. Ultimately we can censor the internet no more than we can censor ourselves.

..........................

Maybe we should create some kind of NCAP honour roll anoiting the up and coming whilst commemorating the departed?

I miss asqy and neo, even ntb and moonlight arn't posting much anymore. : a minutes silence :

asqy's still here. He's just not called asqy anymore.

 

[Aznpsycho]

Really, what the hell can they do? Lay siege to the building containing the internet?

At the most, the internet can 'split' apart. Which is rather pointless, as the point of the net is to be interconnected to others.

And about Doyle's rant, that is absolutely nothing. Tubgirl, Goatse, and furries. You have seen nothing.

 

[breaking]

meh.... so long as i can still post on stormfront....