Redstate

How can I edit a diary after posting?

I was a little upset when I saw the discussion of this topic turning into a discussion of football games.....:(

I reiterate: 1) What makes the national community think they can VOTE themselves the fruits of American labor?

2) I have a hard time believing that the nations most in favor of having the internet surrendered (China, Iran, Cuba, Brazil and unspecificed African Nations) are going to preserve freedom of speech. THESE ARE NATIONS THAT IMPRISON POLITICAL CRITICS. The idea of "Free" speech is completely unknown to them.

This demand should SCARE everyone here. I'm guessing most of the posters and lurkers here are from the United States and can't fathom living in a place where to simply questioning a government can lead to dire punishments. This doesn't mean they don't exist.

Even places considered "free" aren't. There are things you CAN'T say in Canada without being arrested - especially when you're talking about Homosexual issues. There are things you CAN'T say in England - they ban things over there for Heresy. These are countries that are "free" compared to the rest of the world.

This should scare leftists as well. Palistian leaders just condemned mixed dancing and homosexuality. With such a strict philosophy, what do you think they're going to say when they start making internet policy?

This whole idea is bad, cause we often discuss China, Iran, Cuba and unspecificed African Nations here on RedState. What's going to stop them from taking action against us when they have control of the net? (Oh, that will never happen...) That's what they said they about levees breaking in New Orleans.

Once it's gone WE'RE NOT GETTING IT BACK.  If the international community takes the net and starts doing things you don't like YOU'RE OUT OF LUCK. YOU WILL BE STUCK WITH THE WHIMS OF THESE PLACES.  This needs SERIOUS consideration before we follow through on it.

"50. IInternational Internet governance issues should be addressed in a coordinated manner. We ask the Secretary-General of the United Nations to set up a working group on Internet governance, in an open and inclusive process that ensures a mechanism for the full and active participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and international organizations and forums, to investigate and make proposals for action, as appropriate, on the governance of Internet by 2005."

A lot of US campaigning is now on the Internet. This would put the world community in an interesting position of influencing US policy by dictating what can and cannot be said. Thus if we're going to (for example) put a trade embargo on China, the Chinese could (since there is usually a side in favor and a side opposed) influence the outcome they want.

If they're not going to do anything with the net and they're not going to change the net and think the net is fine the way it is....THEN WHY DO THEY WANT IT SO BADLY?

Sorry, I'll try to stop soapboxing now. :)

Even if we in the US lose this vote next month, there is nothing that the UN will be able to take away from us.  The issue at stake is control of the domain name system.

What can happen if we lose control of this?  One (simple) example: people in other countries who visit www.redstate.org may be taken to different sites than people in the US.

So the association between names and websites (or more precisely, between names and IP addresses), will no longer be the same around the world.

For us, nothing visible will change.  For people in other countries, sooner or later, they will have a different internet than we do.  There will no longer be a world-wide web.

Do I care?  Yes and no.  

Yes, because it is infuriating to see these yellow-bellied blacksnakes who silence, maim, torture, and murder people in the name of democracy get to do this all over again in cyberspace.

No, because the greatest greatness of my country is that it can tackle any problem, rise to any challenge, invent any technology, and better the life of every one of its citizens (and many of those who aren't) again and again.

I suspect that within my lifetime, we will see the next big thing come to be.  The thing to replace the internet.  I bet this next big thing will come from the US.  Any bettors against?

It's not that we cannot do better. It's just that we don't seem to care any more.

But I simply disagree with your premise.  What would you say if the UN decided to take "control" of the PSTN(ie the phone network)?  I would laugh them out of the building.  And this is what people should do with this.  

The Internet isn't governable as a whole entity.  Just because the Europeans want to take "control"  of the Internet means almost nothing to the US.  What can they do?  Are they going to call up AT&T and UUNet(aka MCI) and tell them how to run their networks in the United States?  Of course not.  

If the UN decides to take "control" of the Internet will the US then decide to abide by UN rules on free speech INSIDE OUR BORDERS?  

The domain name issue is pointless as well.  If some government wants to change the root domain servers for their country, have a great time.   It won't change how the US operates their domain name services.  Maybe people in China won't be able to access redstate.org but Americans still will.

The Internet is a vast sea of routers and switches owned by thousands of groups.  To suggest someone could control that is simply foolish.

So these people have laid out in black and white exactly what they want to do...and we repost it here...and leftists all over the country reassure me that "they don't really mean it."

I find your reassurance pathetic. You want to tell me that they can't do anything and maybe they can't....right now. Who knows what the future will bring?

For a bunch of people so terrified that their being watched by the Department of Homeland Security you're pretty apathetic that third world dictatorships want this power.....

about what you were talking about I would take more heed in your warnings.

This is a topic I know quite a bit about.  What are these would be "Controllers of the Internet" going to do?  Dicate advances in MPLS implementations?  Control the way BGP advertises networks?  Perhaps they will modify TCP in order to allow them to control traffic?  

How bout you explain to us how some "third world dictator" is going to actually affect the Internet in the United States?  I would love to hear it.

Please explain to me what they have laid out in "black and white"?  What EXACTLY are they going to take control of?  When are people going to learn that politics can't control tecnology?

technology all the time-FCC, telephones, electricity, guns, education, etc. Pretty soon the Dems will control God. :) :)

It's not that they "don't mean it," it's that they can't do it. They're handling things in the typical UN manner: give speeches, pass resolutions, and wish really hard, and maybe the problem will be solved. I mean, the North Koreans probably plan to re-educate us all to reach an enlightened understanding of juche, but I'm not losing much sleep about it.

the FCC doesn't control the technology.  They control the SALE and USE of technology.

Flyerhawk,

It looks like Tzimisce collapsed under that wave of technical questions you posed.

He's an amusing fellow if you've had a chance to read some of his other diaries.

I imagine he's googling like the wind to figure out what MPLS and TCP and BGP means. And I suspect he'll get back to you shortly along with specs for the UN's black helicopter fleet they have patrolling the American skies.

the discussion was about. The government doesn't sell computers or networks either.