ICANN
-
http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=166403839[^] I think maybe the US shouldn't have complete control over these things no? Or are there any good reasons why they should be kept under US control?
I tend to believe that if something is broken... fix it. I don't believe in making changes unless there is a good reason to do so. This issue is *not* near and dear to me so I don't know much about it. I don't believe the U.S. has the inside track on anything but I'm a big believer in the notion that if you fix a system that isn't broken you just did something really stupid. What's the current problem with the U.S. controlling ICANN and how would changing that fix the problem? - Rex
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going.
-
I tend to believe that if something is broken... fix it. I don't believe in making changes unless there is a good reason to do so. This issue is *not* near and dear to me so I don't know much about it. I don't believe the U.S. has the inside track on anything but I'm a big believer in the notion that if you fix a system that isn't broken you just did something really stupid. What's the current problem with the U.S. controlling ICANN and how would changing that fix the problem? - Rex
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going.
Well there is no technical problems. I think its more of a political issue in that some countries are not happy with the US controlling what they see as a global resource. It came to a head when the US backed down on it's agreed plan to hand control over to an international body in June.
-
I tend to believe that if something is broken... fix it. I don't believe in making changes unless there is a good reason to do so. This issue is *not* near and dear to me so I don't know much about it. I don't believe the U.S. has the inside track on anything but I'm a big believer in the notion that if you fix a system that isn't broken you just did something really stupid. What's the current problem with the U.S. controlling ICANN and how would changing that fix the problem? - Rex
I know you can't become if you only say what you would have done and you'll miss a million miles of fun." - Len Work hard, play hard. Don't forget who you are and don't forget where you're from. Do all these things well and you won't have to wonder where you are going.
It's a bit fuzzy but one thing I have seen reported is the US Government is changing from maintaining the system to approving name applicatinos (i.e. if they don't like you then you can't have a .com, .org etc.). I don't have a definitive source on this , just a few online articles, so I'm not stating it as proven but it does seem to be fuelling concerns. The tigress is here :-D
-
It's a bit fuzzy but one thing I have seen reported is the US Government is changing from maintaining the system to approving name applicatinos (i.e. if they don't like you then you can't have a .com, .org etc.). I don't have a definitive source on this , just a few online articles, so I'm not stating it as proven but it does seem to be fuelling concerns. The tigress is here :-D
-
Well there is no technical problems. I think its more of a political issue in that some countries are not happy with the US controlling what they see as a global resource. It came to a head when the US backed down on it's agreed plan to hand control over to an international body in June.
And how many times have we seen a politically-based decision destroy a company or division? "Well, Mr Johnson, while your division is making more money than any other we're going to need to restructure everything to make everybody happy". These types of decisions "to fix something that's not broken to begin" inevitably end in failure. Cheers, Tom Archer - Archer Consulting Group
"So look up ahead at times to come, despair is not for us. We have a world and more to see, while this remains behind." - James N. Rowe -
It's a bit fuzzy but one thing I have seen reported is the US Government is changing from maintaining the system to approving name applicatinos (i.e. if they don't like you then you can't have a .com, .org etc.). I don't have a definitive source on this , just a few online articles, so I'm not stating it as proven but it does seem to be fuelling concerns. The tigress is here :-D
What ICANN is rejecting are names using UNICODE since they lead to extremely easy phishing. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
http://www.techweb.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=166403839[^] I think maybe the US shouldn't have complete control over these things no? Or are there any good reasons why they should be kept under US control?
First, I question the assertion that the US is "a small minority of the networked world." Second, given the incompetence and corruption of international organizations, it would be a disaster to allow the internet to be controlled by them. Third, the only way it would happen is if the US government were taken over by luddites. Possible, but not likely. In the end, it's really all about academics trying to sound important and insightful. (Of course, if the "international community" wants to control a global electronic network, they can go ahead and create one, nobody's stopping them.) Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
First, I question the assertion that the US is "a small minority of the networked world." Second, given the incompetence and corruption of international organizations, it would be a disaster to allow the internet to be controlled by them. Third, the only way it would happen is if the US government were taken over by luddites. Possible, but not likely. In the end, it's really all about academics trying to sound important and insightful. (Of course, if the "international community" wants to control a global electronic network, they can go ahead and create one, nobody's stopping them.) Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
Joe Woodbury wrote: First, I question the assertion that the US is "a small minority of the networked world." Second, given the incompetence and corruption of international organizations, it would be a disaster to allow the internet to be controlled by them. Third, the only way it would happen is if the US government were taken over by luddites. Possible, but not likely. In the end, it's really all about academics trying to sound important and insightful. (Of course, if the "international community" wants to control a global electronic network, they can go ahead and create one, nobody's stopping them.) Well said, got my 5. ------------------------------- DEBUGGING : Removing the needles from the haystack.