Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

I here what you are saying. My point is that the other infrastructure pieces create a check and a balance to the entire system. It is an internet cold war if you will. If Country XYZ forces the UN to require a member of ICANN to shut down access to a TLD in the US, Country XYZ and even the UN

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

What you described is why giving the Internet away is a bad idea. Right now the Internet is stable. If you have countries and businesses fighting over things, my fear is you and I will suffer. In it purist form we are all stake holders and each one of us benefit from what we know as the

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

For the most part you are talking network. Which is needed, however the real control comes with root server oversight. I would agree the network needs to improve. the U.N. will not own our U.S. Internet network. They may have some oversight which we can refuse at some time and just add

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

I probably should have been more forthcoming. What I was wondering is why can't we use the existing Internet infrastructure? What the U.N. would get is oversight of the root servers. If this fails, or even goes a little bad there might be an uprising and a new American Internet could be

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

I don't agree that names are not important. They aren't relative to computers but our human society and economics literally runs on name recognition in one way or another. Working for the largest registrant in the world I can tell you that name recognition is everything in the internet. I

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

At 12:46 PM 8/30/2016, Steve Litt wrote: and sleazy little extortionists (the guy who registered coke.com). Maybe he was not (I don't know) a 'sleazy little extortionist", but someone like me, who, as a franchised Culligan Dealer, begged and pleaded with Culligan, Inc to register their domain

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 07:32:52 -0700 Eric Oyen wrote: > well, so long as you have IP addresses, names are not that important. > That is the key right there. since ICANN deals mostly with assigned > names, it should be easy to work around. > > now, this may be a tauter

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

well, so long as you have IP addresses, names are not that important. That is the key right there. since ICANN deals mostly with assigned names, it should be easy to work around. now, this may be a tauter simplistic view of the problem and solution, but then, it's the simplest solutions that

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

LOL, I did everything but answer your question, which was "what is the problem with using the existing Internet: 1) In dozens of ways, including the "UN connection", or government snooping or corporate snooping or other ways I haven't begun to think of, the Internet and/or its associated

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

You (Keith) mentioned the UN/DNS connection, and the non-political portion of the thread flowed from possible solutions if the UN thing ever came to pass. Eventually it got to mesh, or peer to peer, or whatever you call it, and one person said he wished the solution's communication points could

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

What is the problem with using the existing Internet? No doubt that's fascinating. From a brief read it seems to fit the bill quite nicely from a technological viewpoint. Some potential challenges remain: A lot of people would be willing to buy a $100 repeater for the good of the community,

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 17:00:36 -0700 Eric Cope wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Steve Litt > wrote: > > > On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:53:09 + (GMT) > > stevenss...@cox.net wrote: > > > > > * If I'm going to dream, figure a wireless

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:53:09 + (GMT) stevenss...@cox.net wrote: > * If I'm going to dream, figure a wireless networking standard that > can operate at say a mile's range, even something that drops to > dialup speeds when it's unlicensed and thus you have lots of people > using it. Obviously

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

I'll toss some ideas out. Not saying any are silver bullets but they're possibilities (all of which depend on getting enough like minded people and the willingness to coordinate, but then find a solution that doesn't): * If you just want an alternative space to kick around in and not a

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

Have you ever read the book Cyberstorm by Matthew Mather? They do exactly this. Excellent book by the way! On Monday, August 29, 2016 12:26:04 PM MST subscriptions wrote: > Here is some hope! > The solution is a grass-roots solution. > > To counter central technology, we will use dispersed

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

How can we circumvent the current system and use the current infrastructure? On 2016-08-29 10:00, Eric Oyen wrote: ok, I see some issues here. first off, I am a conservative. I don't hide it but, then, I don't trumpet it either. As far as I am concerned, politics should have very little to

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

ok, I see some issues here. first off, I am a conservative. I don't hide it but, then, I don't trumpet it either. As far as I am concerned, politics should have very little to do with technology or how it gets implemented. Unfortunately, politics has injected itself into our very lives in the

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

Amazing how clear every thing becomes when you take a deep breath!... and burry your head in the sand. On Monday, August 29, 2016 1:43:22 AM MST stevenss...@cox.net wrote: > My suggestion? > > Taking a deep breath, pouring the Koolaid down the drain instead of drinking > it, and repeating to

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

oh yeah, there are plenty of us hams about and some of us are on a local mesh network. now, all I need to do is find a DD-wrt capable router with removable twin antennas, make a beam or 2 and put it on air. anyone got a suggestion on the best model to use? I might also look at using my linux

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 07:01:41 -0700 Keith Smith wrote: > David, > > I had no intention of making this a political discussion. No, of course not. Your suggestion that the U.N. is subject to greater control of "authoritarian regimes" isn't an anti U.N. dog whistle

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

Here is some hope! The solution is a grass-roots solution. To counter central technology, we will use dispersed and independent technology. If and when it becomes necessary or expedient, a community WiFi network is entirely possible. Most people have routers which can sustain a power input of

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

As far as I know, the Internet was created by Americans with tax payer dollars. The Internet belongs to the taxpayers. If other countries do not like that they do not have to play. The Internet should stay the property of the USA. I think we should think about allowing private networks.

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

David, I had no intention of making this a political discussion. That will do none of us any good. It will lead to a long multi-person rant with little discussion of the subject matter. My concern is what might happen. We will not know until it happens. There is a lot riding on this.

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

My suggestion? Taking a deep breath, pouring the Koolaid down the drain instead of drinking it, and repeating to yourself, "I should really stop jumping on every conspiracy bandwagon I see." Seriously, I have little doubt that if we had a republican president and a democratic majority in

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

meh … what do coders know. If coders ran things, there would be two food groups: pizza and energy drinks. And nobody would get paid to write code because it would be illegal to charge for software or to write it. After all, information wants to be free. -David Schwartz -David "The Tool Wiz"

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/14/icann-internet-control-domain-names-iana http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37114313 And for those who don't trust liberals: http://www.hoover.org/research/tricky-issue-severing-us-control-over-icann Basically the US had to turn it over, or

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

8 years ago, when Obama was elected the buzz HERE was how it was wonderful, he'll bring change. 8 years ago, MY reply was: "You people are going to get exactly what you deserve. The only problem (I) have is that (I) will get what YOU deserve as well." On 08/28/2016 09:06 PM, David Schwartz

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

It seems like pretty much everything in America started with the election of one Barack Hussain Obama in 2008. I guess the world will end when he steps down next January, eh? -David Schwartz > On Aug 28, 2016, at 6:58 PM, Keith Smith wrote: > > > The article

Re: An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

In worst case fork the code! Balkanize the internets. On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 7:22 PM Keith Smith wrote: > > The article states in part "Without the U.S. contract, Icann would seek > to be overseen by another governmental group so as to keep its antitrust > exemption.

An Internet Giveaway to the U.N.

The article states in part "Without the U.S. contract, Icann would seek to be overseen by another governmental group so as to keep its antitrust exemption. Authoritarian regimes have already proposed Icann become part of the U.N. to make it easier for them to censor the internet globally. So