In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ronda wrote:
>The whole conception of ICANN is fundamentally flawed. It
>is embodying conflict of interest as a principle, and will
>continue to do so with its membership structure if it adopts
>one. The fundamental problem ICANN represents is that
>it is a privatizing (though under the actual but hidden hands
>of the government) of what there is no authority for the
>U.S. government to privatize.
Possibly, but what happens if either "government" or "science"
encounters problems that may not be technically unsolvable, but are
practically unsolvable because of the high level of politics and
controversy that surrounds them, so much so that it actually drains
the energy of those who attempt to solve them?
For example, you speak of publicly provided water:
>It is like a government taking the water supply and raffling
>it off to those who will put different colors in it and then
>add to the price and sell it at their whim to who they choose.
>The water supply is vital to all in a society. Only a very
>corrupt government (and these clearly are the state of society
>these days sadly) would be considering the color of the water
>as that which can be changed to have someone make money off
>of it, rather than considering the health of the water and
>the fact that it needs to be maintained in a public entity
>that will be held accountable to any harm that comes to
>the water supply of a country.
If you ever lived in a city like Los Angeles, where in many places the
water is (or at least was, when I lived there a few years ago) unfit
to drink unless it's boiled, you'd realize that practically speaking,
neither "government" nor "science" can do anything about these
problems because of the circumstances under which the problems exist.
Arguably, there are individuals who might possess either the political
experience to have funds allocated (or raised) to pay for the
scientific and engineering expertise that would rectify these
problems. However, because of the great deal of controversy that
surrounds these problems, said individuals either tire of those jobs
and wind up resigning, or refuse to take those jobs. This leaves the
jobs to whoever is selected to do them from the remaining candidates.
Yet, in the absence of significant progress on water treatment, a lot
of money has been made by private companies who supply water to
individuals.
While the analogy between LA city water and DNS may not be exact, I
think there are some parallels. You should not expect "government" or
"science" to be able to solve any problem that comes along,
particularly when those problems are highly complex and
controversial.
--gregbo
