1 recommendation |
Hell NO!!!Kiss the Net as you know it goodbye. | |
|
| GoogledYay, I have FIOS join:2001-08-13 Orchard Park, NY |
Re: Hell NO!!!Exactly, hopefully the U.S. will use their veto power to stop this dead in it's tracks. Why should the U.N. have any say in Internet taxation? Sounds like the day of one world government is getting a little closer. | |
|
| |
1 recommendation |
Re: Hell NO!!!Boy - I'll tell ya, I'd much rather spend my money lining the pockets of some millionaires who's company administers the 'net rather than fork a penny over to the UN. | |
|
| Omega Premium Member join:2002-07-30 Golden, CO |
to special13
said by special13: Kiss the Net as you know it goodbye.
Right you are, this is not good. The UN won't be able to run the internet, they can barely manage themselves. | |
|
| | number1melon Premium Member join:2003-01-17 Fort Lauderdale, FL |
Re: Hell NO!!!said by Omega:
The UN won't be able to run the internet, they can barely manage themselves.
Barely? They can't at all, the US has to do it for them! | |
|
| | Dude9What Happens When I Do This Premium Member join:2000-11-20 Chicago, IL |
to Omega
tax tax and more tax | |
|
| UnKnownThe Underground Network join:2002-09-08 San Pedro, CA |
to special13
i agree the internet should not be regulated by any goverment rather than a public company. by giving control of dns to any goverment we can now face laws charges and taxation. the whole argument over dns is a very touchy one at the least, since no1 owns the internet who actually gets the right to name it? i think the original owners of the internet (and not the military if you know your history) should take control of the dns. | |
|
| | tdkyo join:2002-12-07 Rochester, NY |
tdkyo
Member
2003-Dec-5 10:22 pm
Re: Hell NO!!!Tax on domain names | |
|
| KeiferW Premium Member join:2003-05-19 West Plains, MO
2 recommendations |
to special13
said by special13: Kiss the Net as you know it goodbye.
I wouldn't be too concerned. If the UN reacts with the Internet as they reacted to their Embassy getting bombed in Iraq, they'll return Web operations to ICANN the first time a hub goes down... | |
|
| kr3819 join:2001-05-16 Macon, MS
1 recommendation |
to special13
The United States has no business listening to or having anything to do with the United Nations in the first place. Even though it will be hard to control, God help us, if the UN becomes the controller of the internet. | |
|
| |
to special13
It's the end of the world as we know it....well, at least the internet. | |
|
| ravitalJust Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium Member join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH |
to special13
The U.S. private sector built it, and every barefoot thug around the world who spends billions on weaponry and can't feed his people now wants it. Classic case of the little red hen.
Well, if it happens, a private sector of a different kind will create its own internet. | |
|
| bcool Premium Member join:2000-08-25 |
to special13
Has anyone told Al Gore about this? He invented the Internet, maybe there's something he can do to stop this crap. | |
|
| |
aaaabbbccc to special13
Anon
2003-Dec-9 4:15 am
to special13
UN seeks the World Order. They want to destroy the USA. They seek to destroy our sovernty, our 2nd amendment, our language & God. Look at who sits at the table. They are our enemies. See it for what it really is. They seek our money. The EU is the UN. They want to control our military so they can destroy us. Hack the UN if you can. I wish I could! But they already have control of the minds of our business execs so it is already gone. If they succeed, drop all connections. Do not buy anything except real guns & ammo. See what free trade, & globalization reaps. Nothing is free or fair. Free trade has all but destroyed the steel industry & many other industries in the USA. Tele-com is next. Alactel is a French owned company. Alcatel is in every telco in the USA. Most USA based companies are owned by foreign interests. It's already too late! All who vated for Clinton/Gore are getting more than they bargained for. IT jobs are departing for India now. Remote access means IT jobs won't pay crap! When was the last time a TV was built, or repaired in the USA? 1984 maybe. Those jobs left. RCA had the color world wide patent for ten years. People in the USA never learn. when you want lower prices, it leaves the USA. Thank corporations for that. | |
|
| drakeBack to back MVM join:2002-06-10 Bridgeport, CT |
to special13
said by special13: Kiss the Net as you know it goodbye.
So I guess it will be United Nations Online!?!? | |
|
1 recommendation |
VerisignI think all of these talks were prompted because of Verisign's domain redirection. To lay it bluntly, they screwed themselves over. | |
|
| |
Re: VerisignI hope they do it quickly Verisign is a bad, bad company. | |
|
| |
to Nemokrad
Verisign? Sorry but Verisign (internet domain name registrar) and ICANN are two different companies.
This would be like the city taking over electricity because the water company did something illegal. | |
|
| | |
Re: VerisignOnce the UN takes control of things I seriously doubt that Verisign will be allowed to keep their control over the .com and .net domain servers. | |
|
| | | Brisk6 join:2003-07-11 Denver, CO |
Brisk6
Member
2003-Dec-5 10:39 pm
Re: Verisign...and the problem with that is...?
ICANN could have, should have, put VeriSign out of business months ago. But they didn't swing that ax.
It's time that someone with backbone does. | |
|
| | | | Combat ChuckToo Many Cannibals Premium Member join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA |
Re: VerisignAs bad as Verisign is at least they have some understanding of the technology and a vested interest in keeping the internet functional. The UN has neither of these. Imagine some tiny third world nation who gets veto power on the internet committee using it as a bargaining chip; "Give us more 'aid money' or the internet dies". | |
|
| | | | | tdkyo join:2002-12-07 Rochester, NY |
tdkyo
Member
2003-Dec-5 11:54 pm
Re: VerisignThird World Countries demanding fiber optics for their "need in high speed internet", while they resell them to black market for $$. | |
|
| | | | nixenRockin' the Boxen Premium Member join:2002-10-04 Alexandria, VA
1 recommendation |
to Brisk6
said by Brisk6: ...and the problem with that is...?
ICANN could have, should have, put VeriSign out of business months ago. But they didn't swing that ax.
It's time that someone with backbone does.
And you equate the UN with having backbone?? # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ####### # # ####### # # ####### # # ####### # # # # ####### # # ####### # # ####### # # ####### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
-tom | |
|
y2julioBachatero y Que? Premium Member join:2003-03-19 Garden City, NY |
y2julio
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 6:57 pm
wtf??if the UN cant even solve world hunger, what makes them think that they can solve internet related issues? | |
|
1 edit |
Bad Idea...To blatently plagarize a posting on this same issue from /.
"Bad news.
I am completely against U.N. control of the Internet, because I believe it would lead to censorship. I believe the U.N. would use its power to deny domains to those critical of the U.N., or those who hold unpopular opinions in opposition to the U.N.
Exhibit A is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It all sounds pretty good. I think the particularly applicable Article to this case is #19:
Article 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
That sounds to me like one should be able to say whatever one wants over the Internet. i.e., to impart information and ideas through any media.
Now kindly review Article 29, section 3:
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
What exactly are the purposes and principles of the United Nations? If I were to try to register 'theUNsucks.com' would they stop me? My right to free speech ends when I exercise that right contrary to the purposes of the U.N. The U.N. holds all kinds of conferences where they condemn racism and sexism. What if I wanted to create a website about the inferiority of a certain race or sex? Would they stop me? Sure, the opinions I express may be wrong, stupid, and unpopular, but popular opinions are those that don't need protecting.
The U.N. will pry control of the Internet from my cold, dead DNS server."
I agree with every word of this posters post and we need to do someting to protest against this as far as I'm concerned.
Chuck | |
|
Logan 5What a long strange trip its been Premium Member join:2001-05-25 San Francisco, CA |
Logan 5
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 7:08 pm
UN = Woodchuck?Asking the U.N to "run" the internet is like asking how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
Well, since a woodchuck can't chuck anything (it's a rodent) I guess the U.N. Is S.O.L. if it thinks that it can do a better job than ICANN can.
The UN Should be more worried about if it has a future in this World any longer, rather than focusing on desperation measures to give it something to hold on to as it's present world authority wanes.
Many countries see the UN as a joke, and with stunts like this, it's easy to see why they think the way that they do.... | |
|
| bklynite Premium Member join:2001-03-18 Brooklyn, NY |
bklynite
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 8:25 pm
Re: UN = Woodchuck?said by Logan 5: Asking the U.N to "run" the internet is like asking how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
The question asks how much would it chuck if it COULD chuck wood. Thus its a hypothetical question. My guess: 4. --Mike | |
|
nonymous (banned) join:2003-09-08 Glendale, AZ |
nonymous (banned)
Member
2003-Dec-5 7:28 pm
world internet taxSo a world internet tax needs to be set. Who would collect it the UN. Yes we have 85% of the infrastructure, it mostly works. Build there own and shut up. | |
|
| FLea973 Premium Member join:2001-02-27 Morristown, NJ |
FLea973
Premium Member
2003-Dec-6 4:24 am
Re: world internet taxsaid by nonymous: So a world internet tax needs to be set. Who would collect it the UN. Yes we have 85% of the infrastructure, it mostly works. Build there own and shut up.
Well somebody has to pay to wire Somalia with FTTH | |
|
TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY |
Not goodCan you imagine a UN council on the Internet with a rotating chairmen from different countries, With China in control for a time. | |
|
DSLDUDE6Got The Folding Farm Itch Premium Member join:2002-01-07 Norcross, GA |
DSLDUDE6
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 7:49 pm
If it ain't broke.Another good example of "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!" | |
|
| trparky Premium Member join:2000-05-24 Cleveland, OH |
trparky
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 11:35 pm
Re: If it ain't broke.You know the government saying..."If it ain't broke, fix it til' it is." | |
|
gruggniOxygen Gets You High join:2003-07-28 Corpus Christi, TX |
hmmmUN + ICANN = UNICANN This means before the Iraq website, defaming America, can be taken down, the UN will need to vote on it. Therefore, France and Germany will not help to take down the website. Then the USA and UK will create a website take-down coalition. The initial website attack to disable any firewalls will be called, "Hack and Saw" a parody of "shock and awe." I think countries will just end up creating private nets. Thus the internet will be the international means of communications. A country like China will not change, they will keep the rest of the world out their nets. The world will then be divided into a kind of border-net. Not much good will come from the UN having so control. ICANN controls naming. DNS-es just assign names to ip addresses. A WHAT IF? segment: Many ISP's have created their own networks. What if, many open networks become closed networks. Similar to AOL's network. The only way to get into an AOL chat room, is thru AOL software with an AOL account. DNS servers will be smaller, ISPs would only keep entries of paid hosts on their network. A huge money making program comes to mind. If you want the world to see your website, you would have to create an account on virtually ever private network, or some website licensing fee to put a site on every network. wait and see I guess. | |
|
| ••• |
|
gripenfelter
Anon
2003-Dec-5 8:07 pm
gripenfelterThey gotta find something to control, since the oil for food program in iraq is not bringing them anymore funds. | |
|
| |
Re: gripenfelterlol...oh so true. | |
|
| |
to gripenfelter
ha, thats so true, damn corrupt oil for food. what a joke. most of that money whent to saddam's rape chambers for his dead sons. | |
|
1 recommendation |
What has the U.N. done for us lately?The UN is the most incompetent organization ever devised by mankind.
Handing over the keys to the internet to this third-world dominated mob where there isn't even telephone service or paved roads in some of those countries is giving away the store that the U.S. built.
This should be an easy decision for the Bush administration to kill this idea dead in its tracks. | |
|
| •••• |
n2jtx join:2001-01-13 Glen Head, NY |
n2jtx
Member
2003-Dec-5 8:08 pm
This is not a bad idea......if it is the ITU running the show and not some "new" U.N. agency. The ITU does an excellent job of managing international telecommunications and I have yet to hear any complaints about the routing international phone calls or international radio broadcasting. BTW, the ITU predates the United Nations though it was folded in after the U.N. was formed. An alternate organization might be the Universal Postal Union (UPU) that also predates the U.N. although the only tie-in to "postal" might be e-mail. | |
|
| linicxCaveat Emptor Premium Member join:2002-12-03 United State |
linicx
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 8:31 pm
Re: This is not a bad idea...I agree. ITU is a good choice. The problem with ICANN - which does have an international Board of Directors - is that it turns a blind eye to universal problems. ICANN exercises zero control over phony accounts and does nothing to prevent theft, the sale of illegal drugs and other less savory activities. but it does go to great lengths to hide identities.
I do not like Verisign. I didn't like it before it changed its name or its tactics. ICANN, however, is useless. It was a farce when it was set up and it continues to degrade with every passing year.
It is unfortunate that the people who pay to use the Internet have zero input in the digital politics that affect all of us. | |
|
| Matt3All noise, no signal. Premium Member join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC |
to n2jtx
I agree n2jtx, I would also support the ITU control of the internet.
They have done, as you stated, a bang up job so far with international communications, and an even better job of speeding up the communication capabilities of our broadband forefather. (The analog modem, lol) | |
|
|
richardk2
Anon
2003-Dec-5 9:11 pm
Let's show some intelligencecom'on guys, let's show the world that not all of us Americans are arrogant and completely uttlerly ignorant. Some of the post here makes me ashammed and give me the chill. Which cave have you all been living in?
For starter, lets start reading some real news, not the sensational 1-liner and repeat whatever is popular to say.
99% of the things said here about the UN are repeating what uneducated people are saying, without a shred of truth, or understanding of basic things. | |
|
| ••••••••••••••• |
Matt3All noise, no signal. Premium Member join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
1 recommendation |
Matt3
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 9:21 pm
Ramblings...I see it playing out like this:
1) The UN vote passes.
2) Every Geek in America rises up against it. I will be one of them. (After all, didn't WE create the Internet and allow other countries the PRIVILEGE to connect to it??)
3)The EU (excluding Britain) and the major Far East/Middle East powers, (China, perhaps Japan but not India, we're sending them too many jobs, smirk), overwhelming vote to block ALL US providers who don't comply.
4) Certain US providers will comply and all "US to rest of world/vice-versa" traffic will flow through those providers.
5) Those providers will then be under MAJOR economic pressure to allow/disallow certain traffic.
6) The isolationist "wave" of, "Screw the rest of the world, we're better off without them", that is flowing through America right now will flourish.
I hope to god/allah/buddha (or whomever you believe in) I am wrong. | |
|
| |
Re: Ramblings...I would tend to agree with this.. I would think that ITU would quickly become bogged down with politics and money. Gee .. then if you didn't think that it was bad enough that the government had the chance to spot your webbased traffic, lets go ahead and give the UN control over DNSing. Only a foothold to keep moving in to an area where they don't belong.
I wouldn't ask my telephone repair guy to fix my leaky pipes. Not only would it cost me tons more, but it would take him 2-3 times as long!!! | |
|
|
I opt outIf the UN takes over the Internet, I may have to leave the planet. | |
|
| ••• |
PakeIf you can read this.... RUN join:2001-02-22 Huntersville, NC |
Pake
Member
2003-Dec-5 11:06 pm
U.N. = United NimrodsLet's just bomb the freaking UN's e-mail accounts... that'll teach them. They have no right to take control of our creation (for the most part it's ours).
Remember this UN... we brought you into this world... we can take you out if you continue to screw the world up even more and FAIL at doing what you were created to do. | |
|
| |
Re: U.N. = United NimrodsThe united nations has absolutely no business taking control of the internet. I don't even know where they would get such an absurd idea. I have a hard time believing that bush would allow something like this to happen. I think we should all let our government i.e anyone we can know exactly what we think of this idea. | |
|
FLea973 Premium Member join:2001-02-27 Morristown, NJ |
FLea973
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 11:48 pm
Ways to prevent this:Some ways to prevent a UN takeover:
1) Have the US sponsor the resolution and try to strong arm other countries into accepting it - France and Germany with the help of Russia will get everyone together and tell them that the US is trying to cause problems and that they shouldn't touch this issue like the US wants them to.
2) If they do take control - going by past history of UN actions, a few DOS attacks, a few hacks - maybe turning the UN servers into the biggest MP3 and Movie filesharing databases in the world will have them run away and give control back to those who had it before. | |
|
oliphant5Got Identity? Premium Member join:2003-05-24 Corona, CA |
3rd world turdsNews flash...what is in the best interests of some 3rd world hell hole isn't necessarily in the best interests of internet stability. | |
|
| bmn? ? ?
join:2001-03-15 hiatus |
Re: 3rd world turdssaid by oliphant5: News flash...what is in the best interests of some 3rd world hell hole isn't necessarily in the best interests of internet stability.
Hell hole... My that's a bit harsh. Of course what I'm wondering is why countries with no modern industrial complex and whose working population is basically enslaved by foreign mega-corps would be worried about the internet. I'd think they would be more worried about the devils that matter. | |
|
| |
SarickIt's Only Logical Premium Member join:2003-06-03 USA |
Sarick
Premium Member
2003-Dec-5 11:53 pm
New World Order, free speech, nullified. If The UN controls the internet law then, the constitution becomes useless. Even though the internet is a PUBLIC network covering every corner of the US it's be owned and governed by an outside source. This source doesn't need to follow the free speech, and other freedoms we take for granted now.
Free speech, nullified.
Same thing with international law.
If the UN makes a law and countries join up then the international law supersedes the American laws.
Think about the effects on the economy if the UN decided to interfere with industry or access.
| |
|
| rpeAMP join:2000-12-02 San Antonio, TX 2 edits |
rpeAMP
Member
2003-Dec-6 1:29 am
Re: New World Order, free speech, nullified.said by Sarick:
If The UN controls the internet law then, the constitution becomes useless. Even though the internet is a PUBLIC network covering every corner of the US it's be owned and governed by an outside source. This source doesn't need to follow the free speech, and other freedoms we take for granted now.
Free speech, nullified.
Same thing with international law.
If the UN makes a law and countries join up then the international law supersedes the American laws.
Think about the effects on the economy if the UN decided to interfere with industry or access.
Wrong. While the United States IS a member of the UN, this doesn't mean that we give up all of our rights as a nation. It's called national sovereignty. Nations don't completely give up sovereignty when joining. Currently, the US simply either doesn't follow or doesn't sign to stipulations that would infringe upon our rights or our ideals. For example, the US feels that joining the ICC (Internation Criminal Court) would violate some of our sovereignty. So what do we do? Simply not sign on... Secondly, the UN doesn't make "laws" per se. Each branch has the authority to pass resolutions, which are simply documents using words like "calls upon" or "encourages" and "condemns". Do nations HAVE to follow these resolutions? Absolutely not, just look at Israel and the US together openly defying several UN resolutions calling for Israel to concede some land/power. The only body that has any sort of force behind it is the Security Council, and the chances of them agreeing on anything drastic has the probability of a snowball surviving more than 2 seconds in hell, especially with the respective veto powers. It's not necessary to get worried that whatever decision will drastically change the way life is run. After using the pre-emptive strike policy, there's no way this current administration will sign-on much less sponsor anything that would remove internet control out of our hands. | |
|
| | SarickIt's Only Logical Premium Member join:2003-06-03 USA |
Sarick
Premium Member
2003-Dec-6 4:28 pm
Re: New World Order, free speech, nullified.1. Then I guess If they take over the internet then America isn't going to sign on.
There go's the internet.
2. Or we have nothing to worry about because the US won't give up the rights they have over the net. | |
|
paulhaskewUnoffical Dominos Spokesman join:2002-01-10 Vancouver, WA |
WtF???didn't we create the UN???
ICANN rules... UN drools | |
|
|
|