Loss of the internet to forign countries - Mountain Buzz
 

Go Back   Mountain Buzz > Other Chatter > The Eddy


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-01-2016   #1
 
Great Falls, Montana
Paddling Since: .3
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,016
Loss of the internet to forign countries

I don't know how this is possible, and I'm still trying to get all of the details, but on Friday afternoon very bad things were snuck behind our backs.

Control, oversight, and regulation of our (Americas) internet was signed over to a "panel of "undefined countries" through the United Nations. This is a very bad thing folks, and we can battle all day long over all kinds of beliefs, but no matter what we believe politically, religiously or otherwise WE SHOULD ALL be able to agree that this is a bad thing that will get worse.

We have had the most free flowing source of information in all of human history. It didn't need to be fixed or regulated. PLEASE contact all of your Senators, Congressmen, and representatives and don't stop until it is reversed.

ob1coby is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-01-2016   #2
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
It wasn't snuck. It was known for 18 years and talked about heavily for weeks to months. It was always the plan to decentralize the federal control and hand it over to a self governing body of relevant stakeholders, like software designers and engineers.

Also, it was turned over to a US based non-profit called ICAAN. I don't see any control by the UN in their business description or any other information. Several.countries wanted a division of the UN to take it over but that did not happen.

What happened yesterday was only specific to DNS naming protocol. The non-profit doesn't seem to have any capability or right to control content.

And no, we don't all agree on your conclusions. It also appears you might want to vet your sources.
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016   #3
 
Great Falls, Montana
Paddling Since: .3
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by restrac2000 View Post
It wasn't snuck. It was known for 18 years and talked about heavily for weeks to months. It was always the plan to decentralize the federal control and hand it over to a self governing body of relevant stakeholders, like software designers and engineers.

Also, it was turned over to a US based non-profit called ICAAN. I don't see any control by the UN in their business description or any other information. Several.countries wanted a division of the UN to take it over but that did not happen.

What happened yesterday was only specific to DNS naming protocol. The non-profit doesn't seem to have any capability or right to control content.

And no, we don't all agree on your conclusions. It also appears you might want to vet your sources.
Don't talk down to me. I didn't list my sources and I stated that I'm still trying to get all of the details. You can try to brush this away if you want but I stand behind my statement that "It wasn't broke and it didn't need to be fixed or regulated" and the fact that anyone would try causes me to be immediately suspicious of their motives when "it didn't need to be fixed"

In all honesty I'm usually up quite well on my news and I have not heard people talking about this for the last 18 years. Two years ago the Federal government tried to take control and EVERYONE, even Google stood against it. When that failed the Federal Government "assumed" it as a public utility and your telling me that the FG took control just so that they could "give it up"? One thing I know is that the FG doesn't give up control. Now the they are signing it over to a "self governing body of relevant stakeholders" ARE YOU SHITTING ME?!?!?! That is your argument? Do you really think that there is anything that you can tell us that makes it acceptable to give control of our internet away to ANYONE?! IT WASN'T BROKE AND IT DIDN'T NEED FIXING OR REGULATING!!!
ob1coby is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-01-2016   #4
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
You made patently false and hyperbolic claims. I stand by my vetting statement.

ICAAN has maintained oversight and control of DNS domain names since 1998. The only thing that changes is they are not beholden to the Department of Commerce due to a 2014 law designed largely to thwart foreign control. There will be a committee for governments but it will not have a majority control. ICAAN is a California based non-profit.

August article: https://www.google.com/amp/www.techr...-naming-system

March 2014 article: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...2uyx0hgcBztapg

Cruz tried to pressure Trump with his endorsement. Lawsuits have been filed and judges refused to issue injunctions. It's old news for anybody that pays attention to the heartbeat on the Hill. A quick Google search shows plenty of major press and analysis with the timeframe I described.

Loss to foreign countries? False. Snuck? False. United Nations? False. Control, oversight and regulation of America's internet? False.

There is no fixing, no new regulation. Every reliable tech journalist states it will be business as usual.

If you don't want to get called out then don't post false, hyperbolic claims before vetting the information. Pretty simple.
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016   #5
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
You are conflating the fight around net neutrality and defining internet access as a public utility with something as nuanced and specific as domain naming. That's not even apples and oranges. It's more like apples and orangutans.
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2016   #6
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
1998 Memorandum of Understanding: https://www.icann.org/resources/unth...-1998-11-25-en

"On June 5, 1998, the DOC published its Statement of Policy, Management of Internet Names and Addresses, 63 Fed. Reg. 31741(199 (Statement of Policy). The Statement of Policy addressed the privatization of the technical management of the DNS in a manner that allows for the development of robust competition in the management of Internet names and addresses. In the Statement of Policy, the DOC stated its intent to enter an agreement with a not-for-profit entity to establish a process to transition current U.S. Government management of the DNS to such an entity based on the principles of stability, competition, bottom-up coordination, and representation."

"In the DNS Project, the Parties will jointly design, develop, and test the mechanisms, methods, and procedures that should be in place and the steps necessary to transition management responsibility for DNS functions now performed by, or on behalf of, the U.S. Government to a private-sector not-for-profit entity. Once testing is successfully completed, it is contemplated that management of the DNS will be transitioned to the mechanisms, methods, and procedures designed and developed in the DNS Project"

"This Agreement is essential for the DOC to ensure continuity and stability in the performance of technical management of the DNS now performed by, or on behalf of, the U.S. Government. Together, the Parties will collaborate on the DNS Project to achieve the transition without disruption."
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016   #7
 
Great Falls, Montana
Paddling Since: .3
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,016
First, I apologize. I was highly pissed off due to these revelations and my own words were not as courteous or professional as they should have been.

I really am trying to get all of the details on this but it seems to be hard to find both sides of this story. I don't just get my info from CNN. (as in the article that you got most of your info from) I don't make political or religious statements much so when I do its because it is very important and I don't do it lightly.

I don't have much time today but I need to address one thing in particular. Since your trying to discredit me by the "source" argument I will use a story. Lets say you know a guy that is the lead chemist for a drink company, not just any drink company, THE drink company that nearly every single person in America and around the world drinks every day. Recently in a fit of depression he pours out his soul to you and admits that he has been ordered by his superiors and CEOs to add a tiny bit of poison to the drink so that every day the people drinking it become a little weaker and by the time they realize what is happening it will be to late. You don't need to know the recipe or the technical information, nor do you need to vet your source because you heard it from the guy that is holding the measuring cup.

I don't know all of the technical data and acronyms yet but the summery is that this is the "beginning of the end of the informed citizen and control is being handed over to foreign countries that mean us harm". It will start with ridiculous people and web sites that we all disagree with anyway and our freedom and our rights will be chipped away so that we don't realize what is happening until it is too late.

Of course the companies and people "at the top" are not going to just come out and admit this stuff. They are going to hide their intentions in technical jargon of which if understood, then you understand that it sets the ground work for what they want to accomplish.

I'm just trying to raise warning flags here folks. I have no agenda here and I don't stand to benefit in any way by trying to warn people.
ob1coby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016   #8
 
Great Falls, Montana
Paddling Since: .3
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,016
I need to add one other bit to that bottom paragraph because I know how things work around here. Most people here lean in a particular political direction so bias will be created with political accusations as restrac did above. I am not Republican or Democrat. I don't get my information from any one source, especially the GOP or DNC. I don't follow Ted Cruize (in fact I didn't even realize that he was fighting against this until I started to research the details) and I sure as hell won't vote for Trump or Clinton. I became politically active because of the worst president in our history GWB only to have my heartbroken by our current president. I'm not loyal to any of them and now I Just try to pay attention to right and wrong. I have no agenda except to try to learn to care about others more than myself.
ob1coby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016   #9
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
It's not personal but your conclusions and statements continue to be false and easily proven as such. You have the privilege to disagree with the decision but not to state false claims without being challenged.

First, your assumption about my source is false. CNN was not one of the three links I provided. In fact, they were from what appears to be more right leaning sources immersed in the tech world (one that expresses reasoned concerns about potential implications). The third was an actual document between the feds and ICAAN. Other sources I used were Ars Technica, CNET, wikipedia (good to find primary sources like the MOU), and many others that occupy varied ideologies but support the basic facts about timeline, etc. Challenging your sources is fair considering how many of your statements and conclusions are demonstrably false as I have shown. I never named your sources and I don't presume to know what they are but considering how misinformed your original post was it's fair to be move beyond skepticism to a more rigid condemnation.

Your final conclusion is yours to fear but it's based in ideology not the facts surrounding the transfer this weekend. It's also important to highlight the fallacious "two sides approach". There aren't always two sides to facts and more often than not there are exponentially more than two opinions. In this case the facts are clean despite various entities with ideological agendas wanting to.conflate opinion with truth. People can prefer this didn't happen, they can state broad sweeping predictions/opinions about the potential impacts but they cannot expect to define the facts so falsely without being called out. And the two sides approach is just one diversion that seems to have stuck around too long.

I will lay my own opinions down. I don't trust conspiracy theories and the muddled language they perpetuate (that may not be your goal but you have tapped into one nonetheless). Raising flags with hyperbolic, demonstrably false claims and statements is actually harmful as proven by social science; misinformation spreads at a much faster rate than folks committed to fact checking can counter and verify. If a well informed public is critical to a healthy democracy than misinformation is a virulent disease killing our republic. We have seen it distract us from critical issues and decisions. And I am tired of unvetted crap streams in the form of rumor, conspiracy and innuendo being presented as fact. I knew about this issue for a while and it has only taken 15-30 minutes of my time to find quality evidence that disproves your original claims (I can't disprove your personal,political fears).
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2016   #10
 
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,129
Could you show me were I made political accusations against you? And to be clear, I mean explicit statements about you personally that can be factually verified, ie not interpretation or opinion.
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Topic Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Internet Anger kayakfreakus The Eddy 2 11-03-2008 11:26 AM
Do people really find boating partners on the internet? Granpa Whitewater Kayaking 22 05-01-2006 09:28 AM
OT: public internet access in Breck? tpalka Whitewater Kayaking 4 01-09-2005 02:46 AM
health insurance kayaking in other countries? mountainbuns Whitewater Kayaking 5 07-28-2004 06:44 PM
Internet Kayaking channel for quicktime? Full_Tilt Whitewater Kayaking 2 06-24-2004 10:05 PM

» Classified Ads
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.