One Month until the Internet dies

[Orogun01]

For everyone out of the loop, the Obama administration is handing over the internet to the UN which means that freedom of speech and all those great American freedoms no longer apply.
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock/

 

Personally I think that it will be a riot trying to watch Saudi Arabia trying to ban all the gay porn from the Internet.

[Meshugger]

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

[Guard Dog]

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

Barack Hussein Obama. Certainly not a fan of free speech (or any other kind of freedom) himself. 

[Elerond]

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

[Orogun01]

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

Consider that this along with the TTP gives judicial rights to corporations to use governments in securing their interests. If you thought the war on drugs was bad just wait until they start the war on piracy and turn nonviolent offender into criminals.

[Malcador]

Thought they were going to do this a long time ago. Most root servers are outside the US already I believe.

[redneckdevil]

Wtf?!

[Gorgon]

For everyone out of the loop, the Obama administration is handing over the internet to the UN which means that freedom of speech and all those great American freedoms no longer apply.

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock/

 

Personally I think that it will be a riot trying to watch Saudi Arabia trying to ban all the gay porn from the Internet.

Aren't they already censoring. Anyway your link has Ted Cruz's name in it. I mean I suppose it's possible he might have struck on a worthy cause just by accident, still, Ted Cruz.

 

 

 

I guess we can hope for a true extra governmental organisation with respect for free speech in its charter. The bad thing about that is that it would have no public mandate of any kind. No accountability. Think FIFA levels of corruption. 

 

I was unable to find a founding document or general mission statement anywhere, but I didn't look very hard. Maybe it doesn't matter if they intend to have no politics one way or the other.

[obyknven]

All your Internets are belong to us.

[HoonDing]

Better this than hand over control of the internet button to Drumpf.

Edited September 4, 2016 by HoonDing

[Orogun01]

Better this than hand over control of the internet button to Drumpf.

Dear God, how I hate liberals.

[obyknven]

 

Better this than hand over control of the internet button to Drumpf.

Dear God, how I hate liberals.

 

[Oerwinde]

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

Barack Hussein Obama. Certainly not a fan of free speech (or any other kind of freedom) himself.

I read somewhere that using an executive order to hand over government assets to foreign powers was a) definitely unconstitutional, and b) possibly treasonous, and that congress could easily block it

[Meshugger]

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

 

Considering the decentralized american infrastructure, it's constitution and the system of checks and balances, i would say that ICANN is operating at its least lousy place and any move is for the worse.

Edited September 4, 2016 by Meshugger

[HoonDing]

i'll download the internet tonight and back up everything

[Elerond]

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

 

Considering the decentralized american infrastructure, it's constitution and the system of checks and balances, i would say that ICANN is operating at its least lousy place and any move is for the worse.

 

 

If you look history of ICANN you see that it has done lots of shady things. Also I would point out things under ICANN's control are commercial in nature as it controls what domains there are and how much they cost. Like how they created .sucks that works nearly only to shake money from brand owners as they buy .sucks domains to protect their brands but otherwise domain has not seen any real use. Also ICANN has allowed domain name hording which has forced companies pay big sums to get domains for themselves and forces them to buy and hold domains for possible use decades before they are even planing to launch products just to prevent people registering domains that they may use in future. Meaning that things haven't been that good in under US Department of Commerce oversight. Of course in under UN's oversight there is possible that most of the world will vote against western view of things, leading to different commercial options for domains, but some could argue that is democracy in action.

Edited September 4, 2016 by Elerond

[BruceVC]

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

[Orogun01]

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

[Orogun01]

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

 

 

They can't dictate the content.  It is technically impossible.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

 

 

They can't dictate the content.  It is technically impossible.

 

Yes Elerond is correct, the DNS system doesnt dictate content because if you think about it a DNS query is simply a name to IP address translation. DNS doesnt care about  content, only routing 

Edited September 5, 2016 by BruceVC

[Orogun01]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

 

 

They can't dictate the content.  It is technically impossible.

 

One, you assume that the people behind this have a good understanding of the Internet. Two they will use their authority to put pressure on sites, or outright ban them due to certain issues.(EG: why 8chan doesn't show on google searches) They don't need to completely erase content as long as people continue to trust institutions which they control, they only need to direct them to said institutions.

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

 

 

They can't dictate the content.  It is technically impossible.

 

One, you assume that the people behind this have a good understanding of the Internet. Two they will use their authority to put pressure on sites, or outright ban them due to certain issues.(EG: why 8chan doesn't show on google searches) They don't need to completely erase content as long as people continue to trust institutions which they control, they only need to direct them to said institutions.

 

USA is currently leading country in war against internet content and they don't seem to be able to win pirates even though they drive through laws all around world that removes people rights when it comes to piracy.

 

Their ability to dictate internet domains has not helped them much in this fight. And it will not help any other instance who dictates what domains there are. 

 

8chan don't show in google searches because they block googles indexing robots.

[Orogun01]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, what? The organization for handling DNS root name servers and domain names is given to the UN? Who in the blue **** thought that it was a good idea?

 

I would say that it is better idea than let one country decide who has right to have root name servers and what kind domains there can be. But I have my doubts that things will changes to any direction, as there is already Governmental advisory committee where there are representatives from most of world countries and observers from lots of international organizations. 

 

The root name servers are distributed around the world for redundancy. Queries very seldom ever reach them because of caching technology. The root name servers are a . record and have records of the top level domains but the records are replicated between the root name servers. So it doesnt matter who manages them as many countries take house them  

 

Servers don't matter as much as content. They will try to dictate what content should be allowed, which will lead to what happens in despotic Communism: snitching about things that never happened to get someone in trouble and middle manager overregulating because they don't want to get in trouble with the higher ups. Plus if you think that they won 't come up with an excuse to go after competing servers then your are very naive. After all most people don't have enough tech know how to understand or care about this.

 

I can understand that concern but end of the day the actual data is not the concern of the DNS system, DNS simply routes your query to the " www" or " "ftp " which is the actual server that contains the data. The root name servers dont know about the domains lower than the top level 

 

So yes some governments do block some internet sites but the ownership of the root name servers is important but it cant be used to block access to lower sites as this would crash many queries and make overall browsing inconsistent 

 

But they cant use competing servers as then you would need another similar system to DNS, like every company uses its own private DNS, and another competing DNS would be pointless as who would want to register with it ?

 

For one they can dictate content, otherwise good bye being on the mainstream portion of the internet. Secondly, you're not seeing this situation as a whole; is like saying that controlling the roads has no bearing on you driving your car (Tolls will prove you wrong). The fact is that this will put globalist interests  and national interests at odds when they're not aligned, which gives whomever is lining the pockets of the EU control over the Internet.

 

 

They can't dictate the content.  It is technically impossible.

 

One, you assume that the people behind this have a good understanding of the Internet. Two they will use their authority to put pressure on sites, or outright ban them due to certain issues.(EG: why 8chan doesn't show on google searches) They don't need to completely erase content as long as people continue to trust institutions which they control, they only need to direct them to said institutions.

 

USA is currently leading country in war against internet content and they don't seem to be able to win pirates even though they drive through laws all around world that removes people rights when it comes to piracy.

 

Their ability to dictate internet domains has not helped them much in this fight. And it will not help any other instance who dictates what domains there are. 

 

8chan don't show in google searches because they block googles indexing robots.

 

Please, it is well know that Google has blacklisted 8chan. Which means that any content within their domain will not show on searches.

It is akin to a company having a monopoly over all retailers and if you don't do what they say your product wont be sold on their stores. 

BTW the UN and the US government are two different animals with different levels of oversight.