View Full Version : United States Gives Internet Control To UN
Tomorrow,, Gee I wonder who's great idea was that,,,probably the same open borders types,, who was crying weeks back that they got hacked,, showing how corrupt they were,,, he who laughs last laughs best enjoy the censorship.
EDIT: Much better if you posted a link such as those available from mine below, otherwise you give over post control to the management.
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=United+States+Gives+Internet+Control+To+UN
AndyJWest
09-30-16, 03:22 PM
'United States Gives Internet Control To UN'? Nope. The U.S. never had 'internet control' in the first place. Which is of course a good thing...
Betonov
09-30-16, 03:24 PM
'United States Gives Internet Control To UN'? Nope. The U.S. never had 'internet control' in the first place. Which is of course a good thing...
I shudder to think, all that Russian porn banned due to a new cold war :nope:
Jeff-Groves
09-30-16, 03:28 PM
I guess the UN deleted any links to confirm this?
Those BASTUMS!!!
:O:
In before Oberon!!:haha:
http://i.imgur.com/3eue6GG.gif
'United States Gives Internet Control To UN'? Nope. The U.S. never had 'internet control' in the first place. Which is of course a good thing...
Don't destroy their highly beliefs
Let them walk around in that dust cloud of "mis"beliefs
Markus
http://i.imgur.com/3eue6GG.gif
:har:
Jimbuna
10-01-16, 05:48 AM
:ping::ping::ping:
Platapus
10-01-16, 07:05 AM
So this is just about how administers the Domain Name System (DNS)
I am quaking in my boots at this shocking information.
I can't believe that anyone would think that a world wide system of Internets Tubes site names should be governed by a world wide organization and not a single country. :doh:
I suppose the UN will block my application for www.bustyteenagelesbiannunsinbondage.com :03:
I am just not seeing this as any type of problem at all.
At least not in the top 1,000 problems in the world we really should be worried about.
Some hours ago I read following in the Swedish headlines news
Have used google translate
"The US government submitted on Saturday over its supervisory role over the Internet source database to the nonprofit organization ICANN, which manages the worldwide data network all domain names and electronic addresses. Trade Ministry's contract with
ICANN expires as part of America's plan to privatize the Internet. ICANN will continue to be self-regulating and managed by businesses, nonprofit organizations and government-affiliated groups. Critics argue that the handover open for authoritarian regimes to take control of ICANN
Although the change will not be noticeable for ordinary users, it is revolutionary - and welcomed by the Swedish government.
-The Difference now is that the US alone has influence over the governance of the Internet, but that all countries have as much power, says Anne-Marie Eklund Löwinder, Security on the Internet Foundation in Sweden. Fears that totalitarian states should take control of the network dismisses Eklund Löwinder: -There are so many different players involved. It will be practically impossible for anyone or any country to take control"
Can't find anything about UN in this story
Markus
Welcomed by the incumbent left the government in Sweden.:shifty:
AndyJWest
10-01-16, 12:59 PM
Welcomed by more or less everyone except sections of the U.S. right, who don't seem to understand what DNS is, but assume that whatever it is, they should have exclusive control over it.
The whole point of internet infrastructure is that it is decentralised, reducing its vulnerability to attack. Nobody can 'control' it.
em2nought
10-01-16, 01:20 PM
POtuS sure does hate the USA. I don't think anyone can argue that point.
Platapus
10-01-16, 02:02 PM
POtuS sure does hate the USA. I don't think anyone can argue that point.
Pretty much anyone would be able to argue that point.
Do not confuse a POTUS having an opinion different from yours with hating a country. Do you really believe that someone could become president that truly hates his or her country?
There are many many things that I disagree with concerning Obama. Some of them I disagree in the strongest feelings. But I have not experienced anything that would lead me to think he hates this country.
Schroeder
10-01-16, 02:18 PM
Pretty much anyone would be able to argue that point.
Do not confuse a POTUS having an opinion different from yours with hating a country. Do you really believe that someone could become president that truly hates his or her country?
There are many many things that I disagree with concerning Obama. Some of them I disagree in the strongest feelings. But I have not experienced anything that would lead me to think he hates this country.
You don't get it. You're not a conservative extremist = You hate America and eat little children...:roll:
Everybody knows that!
Buddahaid
10-01-16, 02:37 PM
You don't get it. You're not a conservative extremist = You hate America and eat little children...:roll:
Everybody knows that!
Where have I heard that before?!? Just kidding.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Hansel-and-gretel-rackham.jpg/450px-Hansel-and-gretel-rackham.jpg
Phrozin
10-02-16, 10:16 AM
Perhaps I'm just being naive, but I can't see a problem here. the Domain Name Service is just that, it coverts names to ip addresses behind the scene and directs us. If for some reason the blowhards decide to sensor the address www.teensinbondage.com (I think that was one of the jokes I read) then all you'd have to do is WhoIs that domain and enter the ip instead. Basicly the same thing we did in the 80's and early 90's. As for Obama hating America, I don't think he actually does, but he sure as heck hasn't done it any favors. In my opinion he ranks up there with the most ineffectual presidents we've had. Now we have the prospect of another Nixon! Hip Hip hooray!
Torplexed
10-02-16, 10:26 AM
Well, it's an election year and therefore most things said in a political context, even when apparently about technology, just melt into a bunch of partisan posturing.
Well, it's an election year and therefore most things said in a political context, even when apparently about technology, just melt into a bunch of partisan posturing.
To be fair, the op hasn't exactly constrained themselves to just the election year. :03:
Schroeder
10-02-16, 11:42 AM
To be fair, the op hasn't exactly constrained themselves to just the election year. :03:
Actually I was surprised how long he remained quiet considering how close we are to the election.:yep:
Actually I was surprised how long he remained quiet considering how close we are to the election.:yep:
Me too....
Platapus
10-03-16, 03:22 PM
Perhaps he was unavoidably restrained.
Perhaps he was unavoidably restrained.
That could be the straight truth to it, he perhaps was gone for a while with little but his jacket to wear. :hmmm:
Skybird
10-04-16, 05:08 AM
Facts:
The US has given up decisive influence and the ability to block and to seriouls yinterfere with the ordinary web trafick system (like it also can switch off the GPS system used wordwide, in case of military interest recommendign that). This is a loss for the US.
Unfriendly states, interest groups lobbying for this and that, authoritarian regimes, can project greater influence in the above matters.
The globe's major server nodes still all sit in the US and are operated by Americans, and can be switched on and off by Americans.
Via the DNS you also can drastically interfere with global internet operations. That the US has accepted to weaken its position in this regard, does not mean it will easily give up the server node question, which is as decisve, if not more, than the control of DNS.
I still wonder, however, what Obama has gotten in return for this.
A non-American may welcome this step. But we should not forget that it comes at a cost. See second paragraph in this post. That Obama meant it well, maybe, does not automatically mean that something good will have come from this, in the end. Maybe yes, maybe no.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.