What is Digg?150 Comments
- CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I know I want to put the organization that put Libya in charge of Human Rights in charge of the internet. I'm sure they'd do a bang-up job.
- TuringTest, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Oh for god sake people, do you buy all the ***** anyone tries to sell you?
This article is brain-dead scaremongering, transparently so. The organization responsible for writing it are the "national taxpayers union", a rightwing think tank whose previous work includes such unbiased brilliance as
"the government's antitrust case against Microsoft caused state pension funds to lose $38 billion", after substantial donations to them from MS of course.
I agree that this pissing contest between the US and the UN can only harm the internet, and wouldn't trust either to run it. But remember, even control of the the root zone file does not give you the power to do many of the things suggested in this article.
To suggest that the UN could levy an internet tax is so ridiculous that anybody with even a basic understanding of international politics will laugh, hard. The rest of the world no more want UN taxation than the US does, believe me. - ksgant, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The "per bit" tax looks scary enough. But do you honestly thing the US is just going to hand over something they made and is governed by a not-for-profit body to these morons that want to squash freedoms and tax the bejesus out of it? Not bloodly likely.
I agree, if they want their own internet, there's nothing stopping the UN from doing just that. Go on...shoo...go away. - mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Why does the UN have such a hard-on for China? China is a terrible human rights offender. It should not even be allowed to be a part of the UN.
As for the UN gaining control of the internet, they can try. They'll fail. They will set up their own root servers, and NOBODY will use them for lookups. - tekin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4They put a country that has no idea what human rights are in charge of human rights, next it will be Ronald McDonald in charge of the internet.
- T0PS3O, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's interesting to see so many flapping their trap without knowing ***** all what's involved.
For instance, the US government DOES control ICANN whenever they want to, like when they stopped .xxx from being introduced when ICANN was planning so. Quote:
A government report from a few years ago hints that the Bush administration could choose unilaterally to block .xxx from being added to the Internet's master database of domains. The report notes that the Commerce Department has "reserved final policy control over the authoritative root server."
http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gao.gov%2Fnew.items%2Fog00033r.pdf&siteId=3&oId=2100-1028-5833764&ontId=1023&lop=nl.ex
Also, the ITU might not be the most unbiased source but a quick Google shows this has been reported and dicussed by ALL major news sources and this has been going on for years already. So don't ditch the whole concept just because you accuse ITU of being biased. Look further than your nose is long we'd say in Holland.
For those fearing the collapse of the internet, this related article shows this won't be possible.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/u-v/usher/2005/usher110905.htm
To me the UN is definitely not a good option. ICANN has done OK considering the complexity of its task but it is time to move on. Even considering the US holds intellectual property right to much of the web's underlying technology, the 'internet' is not owned by the US - this should be controlled by a more global representation of entities. At least that's IMO. How that would be is the big question here... - MrDarcy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2US invented the network. CERN invented WWW. But the whole information on Internet is posted by everybody in the whole world. It is Internet not USnet. So it's only fair for all countries when UN have control over it!! and guys don't get any "politician" here.
- ichthus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Maybe the UN ought to control the mail systems, airlines, satellite TV networks, etc, too. What makes them think they have ANY claim (or ability for that matter) on Internet governance? The early internet was a .edu-centric structure. With the addition of the WWW layer, it quickly became a commerce-centric medium, and remains primarily so today. WHAT INTEREST DOES THE UN HAVE IN COMMERCE -- INTERNATIONAL OR OTHERWISE? Especially, in light of the Oil for Food caper.
- stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dugg.
A pretty good article there. I hadn't really thought about the tax angle, and what naivette! Imagine forgetting that money makes the world go round. :^P I'd like to point out that nations with taxed or nationalized telephone systems are losing an increasing amount of tax revenue to VoIP, I can't help wondering if that is what is lending a sense of urgency to the matter of UN control of the internet. - Sixcolors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The internet works fine the way it is. No government owns it and it's fine the way it is.
- dolby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5We builted this internet. Why don't the UN go and make there own internet? China did.
- OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I am not interested in giving control of the internet to representives that I do not elect. The rest of the world feels this way about US control, and the US feels this way about UN control.
Giving the UN control is not the solution, all it will do is make everyone equally unhappy. I seriously hope that the US uses it's veto power in the UN on this one. The current situation is not ideal for everyone, but brashly jumping into a worse solution is just crazy. - kevinmoore, on 06/13/2009, -1/+3This thread of comments is excellent. Why? Because it affords one an excellent opportunity to refine their digg block list. Simply block all of the anti-UN morons. The end result is a more intelligent digg experience.
- floorman56, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow,, Funny how people here don't want to give the internet over to the U.N. because of "fill in the blank" but are more than willing to give the U.S. energy policy to them via the Kyoto treaty. I guess it depends on who's ox is being chopped up
- ballsaggins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How much would that "Bit Tax" be in order to raise $12 trillion / year? Why would an international body be collecting taxes equal to that of the GDP of the largest economy in the world? What would they do with $12 trillion?
- ichthus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"I'm tired of my country being the bad guy"
Who's labeling the US as the bad guy?
Islamic dictatorships
The political left that voted in favor of the war, who stand to benefit politically by nay-saying.
The UN countries that were profiting BIG TIME via oil for food
NOT the Iraqi people (those most concerned.)
So, why should you care what the others think? I question their credibility and place ZERO importance in what they think. - linuxcluster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2General Guidelines:
1) Trace article sources (ie: Author, Publication)
1) Read article carefully
2) THINK about what you just read and take the article source and YOUR Logic into the thought process
3) Finally you may Digg
However this article does not deserve a digg! And for some of you I have compiled a list of reading materials (for enlightenment):
The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things by Barry Glassner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_wide_web
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICANN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nation
http://www.un.org - DogHumpsMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Oh please let's turn the internet over to a huge, bloated and ineffectual bureaucracy. I for one and damn tired of having a reliable high speed internet connection. Something really needs to be done about THAT foolishness.
- Magus007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The biggest claim that the US has on the Internet is that it invented the technology. However inventions this big are never owned by anyone. The US didnt invent a lot of things but it uses them.
I am concerned about ANY government body controlling something this important. Although it has not done so, theoretically the US could order ICCAN to shut off internet access to countries that it doesn't like.
You also have a government that is in favour of censorship in the US. As a result you have some of the most censored television outside a fundementalist state. How long will be be before a bible bashing pressure group leans on Bush to impose some form of web censorship "to protect the children". We already have seen them do that in the case of the .xxx domain name idea, which they feared would create more porn. That idea was shelved by a US government representative after 30 letters from a neo-conservative family group complaining.
I agree the UN is not the best body to administer this, however part of the UN's problem is that it has consistantly been ignored by the US which does not feel the need to fund it or be particularly involved (Bush's representative on the UN does not even think the body should exist).
This is a pity because as a body the UN is the first attempts by humans to work together as a global body. Such an entity mirrors the Internet - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I know I want to put the organization that put Libya in charge of Human Rights in charge of the internet. I'm sure they'd do a bang-up job."
--------------------------------
"The United States called for a vote at the commission to signal its displeasure, but no other candidates emerged to challenge Libya."
-BBC - BadDolphin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That is, the National Taxpayers Union, not the UN. I think that was the group that came out hardcore against Open Source a few years back, and was discussed a lot on slashdot. While there are some honest people who object to high taxation rates, most anti-tax activists simply want to dismantle civilized society and turn it over to corporate rule.
- mrkoje, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The political left that voted in favor of the war, who stand to benefit politically by nay-saying."
Do you honestly think it was the left that was after the war? Do you have any comprehension of politics in the US?
Bush ---> Right |
Business ---> More right then left | the right ---> for the war
Republicans in general --> right | - Incognito, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4***** THE U.N Whats the last thing they did that was worth a damn without our help.
Guarenteed when they get their asses in hot water again guess who they'll call to bail them out.
+Digg
***** the U N - nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This article may be just all speculation, but I still see no reason for the responsibilities of ICANN to be handed over to a governing body. With such a small organization leading the DNS, if something went wrong they could fix it in a matter or hours probably. It'd take the UN months.
As for poor nations wanting a piece of the internet, just give them computers. Somehow being able to control the internet won't give access to third world countries.
All this is really is a bunch of countries who are angry that the US has "control" over something so spectacular. - xmodem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This wont happen, its a scary thought that the UN have control of the root servers but honestly the US has too much vested interest in the net we created. And like said before, we aren't stopping them from making there own root servers.
- Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The internet does not need to be managed. Handing out domain names is hardly running the internet. The internet is hugely redundant and runs just fine without any significant oversight of any kind. That is how it was designed.
It should not be ***** with. - WALoeIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
- nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They'd buy shiny pens, that's what... and new headsets, not those paper cup looking things they have now.
- HackWithRamzi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I'll turn black hat if UN has control, so will every other skilled computer geek everywhere."
As will I! The UN will get it up their arse if they try this one.
And they think the Chinese virus writers are bad - wait until they see some American ones! - OutcastJiob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"I know I want to put the organization that put Libya in charge of Human Rights in charge of the internet. I'm sure they'd do a bang-up job."
I agree! Let's hand over the future of technology to an organization that pads its collective pockets through programs like, oh, Oil for Food. I don't see why they shouldn't control the internet--it's an international resource! We should TAKE it from the private company currently "controlling" it and give it to a bunch of bureaucrats who will then proceed to tax the life out of it in order to buy themselves several private airliners--er, I mean, feed the starving children in Africa, of course.
The UN is worthless, let's not give 'em anything else to screw up, okay? - DarkerMaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the UN needs to understand our(U.S)position. We invented the Internet. that means not only coming up with the technology but also implementing it and improving it. the UN doesn't quite get it. its our system to govern. besides why in the hell do you care. from the looks of this article all you want is to tax it. a look at history tells us that taxes lead to rebellion(IE: the Boston tea party.) the goal of the Internet is the worldwide spread of information. so every way you look at it you will not control the Internet. creating your own Internet won't work either because it will divide the world and make any Internet useless
- Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Considering how pissed the US has been at the UN for over a decade (the Clinton administration refused to pay the 'fee' for membership, remember?) I seriously doubt the US will ever agree to the UN's suggestions/demands/lunacy of the week.
- sork, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It should be left in the hands of nerds that know what they are doing.
Politics and tech. don't mix well. There is only one best technical way to do things, until we invent a new, better way.
Making a political play to grab power is just typical of politicians. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The company that posted this previously denounced the antitrust case against Microsoft as being too expensive. It also has a member on its board from the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution. Remember them?
http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Taxpayers_Union - cptshamrock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Seeing as how they cant run anything right, how could they manage the interent, essentially the largest marketplace in the world.
- mushoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"I know I want to put the organization that put Libya in charge of Human Rights in charge of the internet. I'm sure they'd do a bang-up job."
Come on don't try to make this about ethics and moral issues. The current administration's handling of the war leaves too much to be desired in the realms of human rights.
Yes turning control over to the UN would be retarded, but I think that given the global aspect of the internet, no single country or entity should have complete control over it. Instead of squabbling on about how much better we are than them, and irrelevant issues like Lybia, it would be more productive to look for alternatives that bring everyone together. After all, this country seems so intent on spreading democracy, why not apply that same ideology to a forum where everyone is connected? - OutcastJiob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Funny thing is, the demand is for the US to give up control of the internet. News flash, everyone: the United States doesn't control the internet in the first place! A private company does. So ordering the United States to give up their "stranglehold" on the internet won't work, anyway.
- allyourbase, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2People, please, grow up. This article is way stupid.
About taxation: The thought is ridiculous as some sane people here already pointed out. They probably had to dig real hard to find those two ideas they came up with. Switzerland-based organisation... Please, who honestly cares about a Swiss organisation no one has ever heard of? "One 1999 plan" - who's plan was that? Never heard of it before. Utter crap.
About censorship: Ok, let me see. Who's delivering all the technology and software to censor the web in China? Juniper and Cisco are just selling their products, no harm intended? And Yahoo and Google, well, what can I say? China is the UN, too - what kind of argument is that? The UN isn't about censoring the web, this is as ridiculous as taxation.
About bureaucratic corruption: Oh yes, there was corruption in the food-for-oil programm - under they eyes of the US government. Everybody knew about it and US companies profited as well. And now it's just sooo convenient to bring it up everytime you want to do some UN bashing. I guess the current Bush administration is by far more corrupt than the whole UN.
The 'article' is just some republican crap. turingtest is absolutely right, please don't buy their *****. I even had to register because most of the childish, UN-hating comments pissed me off. Please get informed before posting *****. Thank you. - OutcastJiob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Mushoo: that's the beautiful thing about the internet. If a country wants more "control" they just set up their own root servers.
Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that system? - Phoenixfury, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So what if we don't hand over control of the internet? They going to send sharks with freaking lasers after us? Sharks don't do so well on land. They'll have to come up with some other plan that's more devious if they want to take over the internet. :) Maybe they'll threaten to take over the internet for 1 billion dollars. Mauhaha!
- cyberworm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What bothers me, is that an international organization would try to tax me, as an American citizen, or anyone for that matter. Although it's seemingly going by the wayside more and more, there's a thing called "Representation" that comes with paying taxes. I as a voting American citizen have never been given the option of voting any of these clowns in the UN into power, nor has any other taxpaying citizen of the US (or anywhere), and as such, they don't represent me. As our forefathers said, fought, and died for "NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION."
Personally, I'm looking forward to throwing Routers/Switches/Servers/NICs/Modems et al. into Boston Harbor or wherever. - nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Pardon me, Mr. Darcy, but it would only be fair when everyone has control, not any governing body. Those who are most qualified to do their duties to support the internet are already doing their jobs. I'd much rather have the internet the way it is than have it "fair" for everyone. In my opinion, for the individual it is fair because anyone can do whatever they like on the internet, so why change it.
- onebigswede, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1there is no possible way that we should even be considering handing control of the internet over to the UN. If we do i guarantee that there will be restrictions of online freedoms, taxes, and wholesale bungling and corruption.
- lenlewis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just what we need:
Another 8-year old who can't tell the difference between a press release and a news story. - Fobmyxeer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't think the National Taxpayers Union is the best source for a fair estimation what would happen if UN took control of the Internet. I don't see anything substantial in the article.
- CronicusX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1-- Taxes. Since the Internet's infancy the UN has crafted detailed proposals to tax online traffic. Rasmussen calculates that one 1999 plan for a "bit tax," adjusted for today's number of Internet users, would raise 12 trillion dollars this year - roughly equal to America's Gross Domestic Product. Even less ambitious money-raising models such as the independent, Switzerland-based "Digital Solidarity Fund" could feasibly be transformed into future collectors of compulsory Internet taxes and fees.
Go away UN! - meander, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ill make my own internet if they ruin this one...
- Pile, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Reading these comments is scary.
Not because of the total FUD that the moron poster is disseminating, but because every anti-UN comment is totally ignorant and mindless. You people are complete idiots who don't know what the ***** you are talking about. That is the fact. It's really sad and scary to see how many people on this site really are stupid and clueless. Don't get mad at me. I'm not the reason you're an idiot who has opinions based on completely bogus ***** that anybody with half a brain would recognize. It's your fault dimwit. Wake up people. The UN is a multinational organization. It is involved in thousands of different projects. Do you believe everything you read online? Are you that stupid? This article is total propaganda that has absolutely no relevance or truth to it. The UN has no authority to tax people. Man, you dweebs will believe anything. Let me know next time some of you want to play poker. - galfridus73, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Okay, folks: TIME TO RTFA.
1) See the contact information at the top of it? This isn't an article. It's a press release and pholower should have realized that this is not, in any way, shape, or form, an article and it shouldn't be presented as such.
2) ICANN is a U.S. Government contractor (http://www.icann.org/tr/english.html). So, yes, the U.S. does own the basic bits and pieces of the Internet and ICANN manages them ("ICANN is responsible for coordinating the management of the technical elements of the DNS to ensure universal resolvability so that all users of the Internet can find all valid addresses. It does this by overseeing the distribution of unique technical identifiers used in the Internet's operations, and delegation of Top-Level Domain names (such as .com, .info, etc.).").
3) The actual summit that is in Tunisia this week is the World Summit on the Information Society. All of the official WSIS information you could possibly want is at http://www.itu.int/wsis/ and you might want to try reading up on a subject that I'm sure less than 5% of you have any clue about before you go whining about how "unpatriotic" the UN is.
I'm not saying there aren't issues to be discussed here, because there are, but taking your information from an EXTREMELY biased source and nothing else does nothing to help actually discuss the issues - it just becomes a pissing match.
No digg. - pxabstract, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I don't know if I want the UN controlling the Internet either, but this argument that "We Americans invented it so it's our's" is stupid. The US may have invented DARPA-Net way back when, but the rest of the world had just as much to do with the innovations that are the modern-day Internet as the US does. To claim ownership over it because you invented the baseline, completely irrelevant today technology that it is now based on is like saying "I invented gasoline so I clearly own the concept of cars too!" The United States likes to claim ownership of anything it wants and is terrified of anything it can't control or is at risk of losing control of. I'm not sure who should control the root servers, but it shouldn't unilateraly be the US. Contrary to what many Americans think, this is not the US' planet and since you depend on the Internet as much as or more than the rest of the world, I say sit down and shut up.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 149 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is