States Sue To Block White House Plan For Internet Transition

I don't know why the Republicans are fighting this so hard. Since there will never be another Republican President, this move will take the Internet out of the control of the Democratic Party.
 
That is good and bad. I think we may be fucked either way. But if the UN ever gets control of it we will be fucked. That is all the corrupt UN can do. Fuck shit up.
 
evilsofa said:
I don't know why the Republicans are fighting this so hard. Since there will never be another Republican President, this move will take the Internet out of the control of the Democratic Party.
Click to expand...

After studying the news for some time, the ship keeps sailing the plotted course, we may end up never having another president period.
 
We certainly have not had anyone presidential in a long while. :p
 
pxc said:
Still waiting for an explanation of that "benefit" you based your whole critique of the FAQ on...

Goal posts are still a-movin' towards Wild Speculationville (pop. uninformed), apparently.
Click to expand...

The benefit is that ICAAN will have control of those functions and not the US Government via the contract currently in place. What can be leveraged, once control is gained, would be speculation, but control itself is not.
 
heatlesssun said:
What does ownership mean in the context of the internet? It's not a piece of property and the power of it comes through global use and openness.
Click to expand...

It's true, but for it to continue to remain global and open, control must be maintained by someone who will work to keep things this way. Frankly, I trust our own government more than ICANN alone and certainly more than I do an International body made up of governments with exactly the opposite history. Several decades of history attest to pretty decent stewardship and I see no reason to place that at risk, even if it is for the sake of "building bridges and international good will".
 
freeloader1969 said:
Another stupid Obama moment. If it ain't broken, don't fix it comes to mind. :(
Click to expand...

I didn't realize Obama was president in 1998.

Honestly guys do some research before you make it political. More than what your politician or talk show host thinks they know about it. ICANN has been doing this since 1998 and the commence dept just rubberstamped changes to DNS anyways. And the few times that the US did try to shape what domains are available, ICANN did what they originally planned anyways. It's symbolic and other other circumstances with all the internet businesses that support it you would be saying it's the best thing ever to happen to the internet.
 
doublejack said:
The internet, regardless of who created it, is a global resource. I see absolutely no reason the US or any other single nation should have control over it alone at this point. I am 100% behind the President on this topic.
Click to expand...
What's broke? The inability to censor traffic from outside your country?
 
Ryokurin said:
I didn't realize Obama was president in 1998.

Honestly guys do some research before you make it political. More than what your politician or talk show host thinks they know about it. ICANN has been doing this since 1998 and the commence dept just rubberstamped changes to DNS anyways. And the few times that the US did try to shape what domains are available, ICANN did what they originally planned anyways. It's symbolic and other other circumstances with all the internet businesses that support it you would be saying it's the best thing ever to happen to the internet.
Click to expand...

Again, You are never going to convince me that changing it is smart.

If it's not broke, don't fix it.

On the one hand, if you say ICANN is really in control and the government isn't really doing anything what's wrong with that.
And if the government's technical control is of consequence, again, it's been running great so far, why screw with a good thing.

You can say that over 20 years of success is something we should be screwing with without pointing out problems somewhere. But there are no problems to point out except that there is political pressure for the US to turn this over to ICANN so that it is one step closer to being turned over to the UN.

And it is not symbolic. It's contracted. And contracts can be changed and they can be cancelled and they can be awarded to others if appropriate.
 
You would think [H] forum goers understand how the internet works but apparently that is not the case.
 
pxc said:
Since almost no one here understands the (limited) scope of this transfer, I'll repost this information from the last time ignorant people freaked out:
Click to expand...

Actually caring about educating others means delivering corrective information in a civil format. If you can't come into a thread without calling people ignorant(numerous times for you just on the first page), then maybe you're an asshole.
 
evilsofa said:
I don't know why the Republicans are fighting this so hard. Since there will never be another Republican President...
Click to expand...

If you actually believe this, put money on that proposition. Seriously. It'll be funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top