 ShootToThrilTell The TruthPremium
join:2004-06-07
Sherman Oaks, CA | The Horror. So now the rest of the world will start developing technology without being dependent on the ICANN.... Oh the horror, the communist are going to rule the world again????..... Fellow Americans, enough having both eyes blind, we have stayed behind far to long stumping our feet on the whim of corporations and a government who's not willing to commit to a true plan that will keep the US in the front line of innovation & information technology.
just like sputnik, maybe this move by china and other countries to follow would be a sufficient reason for the US to get our A** going again on the path of technology;). |
|
| ICANN is International, only 2 of the 15 directors are American citizens. ICANN only controls 1 root server of the 10 or so. What you object to is the old contractual and historic ties ICANN has/had with the US government. I can tell you this there is no conspiracy to control/filter internet content at the root server level by the US government but I'll bet my house that the only reason China is doing this is to do just that, control what it's populace sees. Is this a good thing for worldwide internet governance? |
|
|
|
| reply to ShootToThril
just like sputnik, maybe this move by china and other countries to follow would be a sufficient reason for the US to get our A** going again on the path of technology
Sputnik didn't tell anybody what they could and could not read. That's the big difference.
This is like a church owning the only printing press in town. |
|
ShootToThrilTell The TruthPremium
join:2004-06-07
Sherman Oaks, CA | And.....You missed the point. Sputnik put pressure on the US to get in on the race before it's too late!!! |
|
| reply to ShootToThril
Theres a good reason for China wanting to do this, US has used its control of the root servers to block foreign DNS resolution without warning the parties in question and have provided no means to address issues.
Of course splitting root DNS is going to break alot of legitimate business on the Internet which is contrary to the
US assertion of protecting its intrests on the Internet in the first place. |
|
ShootToThrilTell The TruthPremium
join:2004-06-07
Sherman Oaks, CA | reply to pjhofmann
Maybe china would be the Bad example of this whole thing, but never the less, It's getting our attention here at BBR, who else do you think is going to be watching?....Brain storming if something can or should be done...:D |
|
| reply to ShootToThril
said by ShootToThril:And.....You missed the point. Sputnik put pressure on the US to get in on the race before it's too late!!! I got your point, but its a distinctly different thing. The US has plenty of wake-up calls on broadband deployment and IT application, but it sure hasn't taken any.
This is a more strictly political issue. |
|
| reply to Bait_hammer
Theres a good reason for China wanting to do this, US has used its control of the root servers to block foreign DNS resolution without warning the parties in question and have provided no means to address issues.
I'm interested in this assertion. Could you explain further or provide some links to more in-depth material involving specific instances of such? |
|
ShootToThrilTell The TruthPremium
join:2004-06-07
Sherman Oaks, CA | reply to broadbander
Political is even Better....it will make someone in the oval office say "Nobody F*&^s with the US, I want everybody you have on this right now".:D |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
 ·Vonage
·ViaTalk
| reply to broadbander
said by broadbander:just like sputnik, maybe this move by china and other countries to follow would be a sufficient reason for the US to get our A** going again on the path of technology
Sputnik didn't tell anybody what they could and could not read. That's the big difference. This is like a church owning the only printing press in town. Or the liberal media  |
|
 kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | reply to pjhofmann
said by pjhofmann:ICANN is International, only 2 of the 15 directors are American citizens. ICANN only controls 1 root server of the 10 or so. What you object to is the old contractual and historic ties ICANN has/had with the US government. I can tell you this there is no conspiracy to control/filter internet content at the root server level by the US government but I'll bet my house that the only reason China is doing this is to do just that, control what it's populace sees. Is this a good thing for worldwide internet governance? Usual ignorant BS... at least check the subject: »root-servers.org/
10 out of the 13 root servers are on American soil and half of them under direct (ie DoD, Army, NASA etc) or indirect (ie univs, Verisign etc) governmental influence.
By the way last time our Mighty Freak's Administration was able to block the introduction of the .xxx TLD - stop this fuckin dezinformation about the US control. We do have the full control of DNS. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | reply to DaveDude
said by DaveDude:said by broadbander:just like sputnik, maybe this move by china and other countries to follow would be a sufficient reason for the US to get our A** going again on the path of technology
Sputnik didn't tell anybody what they could and could not read. That's the big difference. This is like a church owning the only printing press in town. Or the liberal media Too bad it doesn't really exist... most of those "studies"  count Jo Klein, a liberahater Jew as 'progressive' - ROFLMAO! - and David Broder as neutral... yawn... so pathetic try to hide the obvious overwhelming presence of right-wing nuts and their loyal anchors like Tim "Meet The Press" "GOP into rectum" Russert... |
|
| said by kamm:Too bad it doesn't really exist... most of those "studies" count Jo Klein, a liberahater Jew as 'progressive' - ROFLMAO! - and David Broder as neutral... yawn... so pathetic try to hide the obvious overwhelming presence of right-wing nuts and their loyal anchors like Tim "Meet The Press" "GOP into rectum" Russert... Aw, the usual relatively well-studied, but still biased position. Care to do some research beyond the terribly one-sided "what liberal media?" You'd find that the media is predominantly liberal on social issues, conservative on financial matters and generally more critical of Republican administrations. One must listen to both voices and see through both lenses to hope to get the truth.
How do journalists vote? What party do they register with?
Just an easy summary
print media is generally liberal
television media is fairly split
radio is generally conservative |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | said by broadbander:said by kamm:Too bad it doesn't really exist... most of those "studies" count Jo Klein, a liberahater Jew as 'progressive' - ROFLMAO! - and David Broder as neutral... yawn... so pathetic try to hide the obvious overwhelming presence of right-wing nuts and their loyal anchors like Tim "Meet The Press" "GOP into rectum" Russert... Aw, the usual relatively well-studied, but still biased position. Care to do some research beyond the terribly one-sided "what liberal media?" You'd find that the media is predominantly liberal on social issues, conservative on financial matters and generally more critical of Republican administrations. One must listen to both voices and see through both lenses to hope to get the truth. One is probably living in a different country than I do - media, by general and at large, is absolutely right wing for years now and still moving towards the right.
How do journalists vote? What party do they register with?
Just an easy summary
print media is generally liberal
Suuuuure. That's why NY Times did NOT release the NSA scandal before last election, moreover it postponed indefinitely. They only acted last December when their writer's book was close to release, sporting this story too.
BS. There's a very well-shaped right-wing opression all around the printed media.
television media is fairly split
Hahaha, sure. See above my comments on this "fairly split" crap, when Joe Klein is "progressive" etc...:D
radio is generally conservative
First of your points I'm agreeing with you. |
|
| reply to kamm
I guess reading comprehension is not one of your strong suits. If you read my initial reply again you'll see that I never say that most of the root servers are not on US soil but that ICANN itself controls only 1. Despite your obvious leanings, ICANN and the US government are not the same thing.
"We do have the full control of DNS."
Are "We" the same as the nebulous "They" that are out to get you? |
|
