On Vannevar's Bush's "Science: The Endless Frontier" and the ICANN/IANA
problem:
Following are some thoughts on trying to put what is happening
into a context about the U.S. government transferring ownership
and control over essential points of control of the Internet
into a private sector entity controlled by who knows whom, and
currently called ICANN (i.e.giving away the Internet's controlling
functions of the IP numbers, DNS system, port numbers, protocols, etc.)
Recently I read Vannevar Bush's proposal about "Science
The Endless Frontier".
I have found "Science: the Endless Frontier" quite fascinating in
the argument it makes for the importance of U.S. government
support for basic science and technology research. It is
helpful to see the description of why such research is so
important to the well being of the economic and social life
of society. And it puts the research on defense questions
within a broader context of social questions and proposes
that there be one scientific entity within U.S. government
to support this broader range of science (which would include
defense related research). It makes it seem as if ARPA is the
prototype of a broader form of entity that is needed so that
the social context is the framework for the support of basic
science and technology research, including defense basic research.
The real problem that the DNS wars show is that the U.S.
government doesn't seem to be supporting the needed scientific
research about how to provide for the scaling of the Internet.
And the U.S. government's effort to transfer ownership
and policy over IANA functions which include both
control over the Internet as well as the scaling mechanism
of the Internet, to some hidden entity (hidden behind ICANN)
seems a great problem for those who care about the continued
well being and development of the Internet and are dependent
on the Internet for real life needs and especially
for communication.
In this context it would seem there is a need for
the U.S. government to support the scaling and further
development of the Internet, and particularly the
IANA functions. As the important development of
research by IPTO/ARPA under the Dept. of Defense provided
the basis for a public communications structure, this leads to
looking back at Bush's recommendations as they have
proven to be the inspiration for important developments
like the Internet. (Also this leads to realizing that
in fact good communication among the people of a nation
are indeed what sets the basis for the defense of the people
of that nation. And that good communication among people
around the world is a real weapon in the battle against
the forces that want to enslave any people. So that
the Internet is indeed the kind of development that
is the proper and valuable kind of activity for
the defense agencies of the governments of the peoples
of nation/s around the world to support.)
Bush proposed that defense related research be
carried out by a U.S. government entity in the context
of a broader social framework for scientific research.
He also proposed that other forms of scientific research
along with defense related scientific research be
part of the new science research agency he was proposing.
Bush develops a broad set of arguments about
why science and technology work have to be done
for the economy to develop.
I had been following some leads to figure out what is
behind the ICANN and got back to the Office of Inspector
General's Report of 1997 where she proposed the need
to maintain scientific and government expertise in
administering and setting policy for IANA functions.
However, it seem that she lost her job as a result of
such recommendations, and instead the Framework
for Electronic Commerce was written and ICANN set up
to give IANA away to those who promote "market" activity.
So it seems that the contest is between
1) seeing the Internet as the confirmation of the
power of Bush's recommendation on the importance of
government supporting basic research in science and
technology
versus
2) the contrary view that says that the market will
create all that the society needs and government
has to help the market to function.
#1 seems to be the line of forward direction,
and #2 and the ICANN developments and the effort,
to reverse this forward direction.
The important developments at IPTO/ARPA over the past
30 years are a demonstration of the fact that what
Bush proposes is not just a theory, but has in fact
been demonstrated.
Hence the great importance of increasing government
support for basic science and technology research.
But instead the U.S. current government policy is in the
opposite direction. And the U.S. government support
for ICANN the weathervane of that harmful policy.
Ronda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook
also in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
