Comments on: Power grab could split the Net

CNET News.com's Declan McCullagh says a spat over who rules the domains could lead to a Balkanized Internet.

[David Arbogast]

Ask Al Gore

Hey... what does Al Gore think? After all, he invented the dang thing. ;)

[David Arbogast]

Ask Al Gore

Hey... what does Al Gore think? After all, he invented the dang thing. ;)

[truegenius]

And they said the U.S. didn't need anyone else...

This is a perfect example of this administration's go-it-alone, [ignore]-the-world (I wanted to use a stronger term in the brackets, believe me) attitude come back to haunt us. I have to believe that the reason for the backlash and the push to get control of Internet domain servers into other countries' hands has been the abysmal track record the U.S. has had in foreign relations these (by 2008) last eight years. The Internet up until now has been a nicely structured "network of networks" that now looks like it will be splintered. While it may be true that most folks on these shores couldn't care less about accessing web pages across the Atlantic or Pacific, for those interested in world events first-hand or learning about other cultures, this could present some major problems.

Censorship, anyone?

[truegenius]

And they said the U.S. didn't need anyone else...

This is a perfect example of this administration's go-it-alone, [ignore]-the-world (I wanted to use a stronger term in the brackets, believe me) attitude come back to haunt us. I have to believe that the reason for the backlash and the push to get control of Internet domain servers into other countries' hands has been the abysmal track record the U.S. has had in foreign relations these (by 2008) last eight years. The Internet up until now has been a nicely structured "network of networks" that now looks like it will be splintered. While it may be true that most folks on these shores couldn't care less about accessing web pages across the Atlantic or Pacific, for those interested in world events first-hand or learning about other cultures, this could present some major problems.

Censorship, anyone?

Not (much) more than anyone else

I don't think that any one nation can pretend having "created"
the internet. The US certainly didn't lay down the backbones in
Europe and Asia ;-) The main contribution made by US-based
research groups was probably the development of the TCP/IP
protocol. As far as the World Wide Web is concerned, it is
commonly recognised that it was created at CERN:

<http://www.cern.ch/>

The CERN is physically located in Switzerland but hosts
researchers from all over the world.

In any case, the internet emerged from the common efforts of
many research groups around the world. Most of them would
probably not consider themselves as committed to one
particular nation anyway, so attributing the internet to one
nation is just a pointless exercise that only creates resentment.

Not (much) more than anyone else

I don't think that any one nation can pretend having "created"
the internet. The US certainly didn't lay down the backbones in
Europe and Asia ;-) The main contribution made by US-based
research groups was probably the development of the TCP/IP
protocol. As far as the World Wide Web is concerned, it is
commonly recognised that it was created at CERN:

<http://www.cern.ch/>

The CERN is physically located in Switzerland but hosts
researchers from all over the world.

In any case, the internet emerged from the common efforts of
many research groups around the world. Most of them would
probably not consider themselves as committed to one
particular nation anyway, so attributing the internet to one
nation is just a pointless exercise that only creates resentment.

[draco2517]

split and find common ground

The U.S. is directly responsible for the internet and its contents. Hence, the U.S. must retain control. However, other governments should develop and build their own internets as well. The position to communicate a new means of compatibility will now open up. For you html coders, xhtml came out and because of incompatibility between webbrowsers a group formed to negotiate means to what should stay and what should go. Keep in mind this group is comprised of alot of people, including microsoft *ie* and netscape. firefox, and all the other companies get together. See where i'm going with this? For those of you who can't think *and i understand i have the same problem :)*

Companies = Governments
Web Browsers = Multi-Internet

Officials from governments participating in cyberspace must be part of a group to form means of compatibility and cross navigation. This is simple...easy...effective...and peace-making. I here by rename the internet as we know it today...as us-intranet!

[draco2517]

another note

In terms of sharing domain names and whatnot, cyberspace is space...i don't care how you look at it...space is space. US and UN and Iraq are all space. Didn't stop someone from going in and claiming it. Once claimed...it is owned and available to rent or buy. Cyber space...these names and domains and everything that hasn't been claimed or thought up of, is free. Walla...free. Once claimed, it is available to buy or rent. In order to avoid Suntrust bank in the US and iraq's Suntrust bank *not owned by the same company for example purposes* www.suntrust.com will only be claimed once. its pretty easy to alter a domain name idea if it has already been claimed. www.suntrust.com and another one will be www.suntrustbank.com wow...amazing..look at that. Both dns will translate into different ip's and now there is a difference.

Unless i'm misunderstanding something at an IT Tech, this is very simple problem to solve. Politicians need to leave technology to the IT Tech's while the IT Techs leave politics to politicians.

You don't moe on another mans lawn without expecting trouble.

[draco2517]

split and find common ground

The U.S. is directly responsible for the internet and its contents. Hence, the U.S. must retain control. However, other governments should develop and build their own internets as well. The position to communicate a new means of compatibility will now open up. For you html coders, xhtml came out and because of incompatibility between webbrowsers a group formed to negotiate means to what should stay and what should go. Keep in mind this group is comprised of alot of people, including microsoft *ie* and netscape. firefox, and all the other companies get together. See where i'm going with this? For those of you who can't think *and i understand i have the same problem :)*

Companies = Governments
Web Browsers = Multi-Internet

Officials from governments participating in cyberspace must be part of a group to form means of compatibility and cross navigation. This is simple...easy...effective...and peace-making. I here by rename the internet as we know it today...as us-intranet!

[draco2517]

another note

In terms of sharing domain names and whatnot, cyberspace is space...i don't care how you look at it...space is space. US and UN and Iraq are all space. Didn't stop someone from going in and claiming it. Once claimed...it is owned and available to rent or buy. Cyber space...these names and domains and everything that hasn't been claimed or thought up of, is free. Walla...free. Once claimed, it is available to buy or rent. In order to avoid Suntrust bank in the US and iraq's Suntrust bank *not owned by the same company for example purposes* www.suntrust.com will only be claimed once. its pretty easy to alter a domain name idea if it has already been claimed. www.suntrust.com and another one will be www.suntrustbank.com wow...amazing..look at that. Both dns will translate into different ip's and now there is a difference.

Unless i'm misunderstanding something at an IT Tech, this is very simple problem to solve. Politicians need to leave technology to the IT Tech's while the IT Techs leave politics to politicians.

You don't moe on another mans lawn without expecting trouble.

[omaryak]

Not so fast on bashing the U.N.

While it is a fair question to say that oppressive governments like Iran and China shouldn't have control of the Internet as a whole, they are already taking part in censorship within their own countries. As long as a U.N. regulatory body maintained a policy like the one of the Security Council where any nation could veto the actions of another, the worldwide nature of the Internet would remain safe.

You seem to forget that the U.N. relies on the contributions of member nations for its actions, and rarely does it act if its member nations disagree. Such a setup is fundamental to an international organization that preserves the principle of national sovereignty.

Fearmongering by citing the less democratic nature of some U.N. members as a potential barrier to U.N. Internet regulation gives in to the very all-or-nothing mentality you say is threating to split the Internet.

[omaryak]

Not so fast on bashing the U.N.

While it is a fair question to say that oppressive governments like Iran and China shouldn't have control of the Internet as a whole, they are already taking part in censorship within their own countries. As long as a U.N. regulatory body maintained a policy like the one of the Security Council where any nation could veto the actions of another, the worldwide nature of the Internet would remain safe.

You seem to forget that the U.N. relies on the contributions of member nations for its actions, and rarely does it act if its member nations disagree. Such a setup is fundamental to an international organization that preserves the principle of national sovereignty.

Fearmongering by citing the less democratic nature of some U.N. members as a potential barrier to U.N. Internet regulation gives in to the very all-or-nothing mentality you say is threating to split the Internet.