US Hands IANA to ICANN

[GoZone]

https://www.cnet.com/news/us-internet-control-ted-cruz-free-speech-russia-china-internet-corporation-assigned-names-numbers/

 

Edited October 2, 2016 by GoZone
Due to some errors on the post.

[jasonvp]

1 minute ago, GoZone said:

In a nutshell that the US handed the IANA to ICANN which can now control the Internet in free will without any questions. Censorship concerns are the biggest problems and then the following of our social media sites being blocked or be in effect. the problem too is that nobody is talking about it in mainstream media. 

This paragraph can be summarized better as:

 

"I don't understand how the Internet name resolution system works, so I'm going to claim censorship and try to incite panic."

[Master Disaster]

5 minutes ago, GoZone said:

https://www.cnet.com/news/us-internet-control-ted-cruz-free-speech-russia-china-internet-corporation-assigned-names-numbers/

 

In a nutshell that the US handed the IANA to ICANN which can now control the Internet in free will without any questions. Censorship concerns are the biggest problems and then the following of our social media sites being blocked or be in effect. the problem too is that nobody is talking about it in mainstream media. 

Because its a non issue. 

 

A) They don't control the Internet, they control the designation of IP addresses

B) ICANN have already had effective control for a long time, this only makes it official 

C) Trump hasn't got a clue what he is talking about

D) Why is it OK for America to "control the Internet" but not anybody else? 

[Sakkura]

Not this ignorant BS again...

[Volbet]

It might be that the mainstream media don't discuss this, but we have discussed this to death and to hell and back.

ICANN has never and will never be able to control the internet or the content on the internet. It only designates IP-addresses.

The fear of censorship is completly unfounded and serves as nothing more than fear mongering. 

[handymanshandle]

5 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

D) Why is it OK for America to "control the Internet" but not anybody else? 

I think there might be some justifications but idk.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, wcreek said:

I think there might be some justifications but idk.

Well historically they invented it which is why they had control over the designation of IP addresses but there's no reason why they should keep control of it. It needs to be handled by someone/thing totally impartial. 

[handymanshandle]

10 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Well historically they invented it which is why they had control over the designation of IP addresses but there's no reason why they should keep control of it. It needs to be handled by someone/thing totally impartial. 

Perhaps, but I'm not aware of any issues it has caused abroad with the US controlling the Names and Numbers of the Internet, or otherwise the organizations that maintain DNSes.

[Master Disaster]

27 minutes ago, wcreek said:

Perhaps, but I'm not aware of any issues it has caused abroad with the US controlling the Names and Numbers of the Internet, or otherwise the organizations that maintain DNSes.

Oh no, to be fair America has done a great job up to this point (one of the rare occasions you can say that) but the internet is now one of the most important things that exists and everyone should get an equal say in its future, it could be dangerous if the USA retains such a huge bargaining chip moving forward. 

 

Remember that it was the USA that invented networked communication but it was the English who invented HTML so we should get 50/50 split otherwise

[patrickjp93]

21 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Oh no, to be fair America has done a great job up to this point (one of the rare occasions you can say that) but the internet is now one of the most important things that exists and everyone should get an equal say in its future, it could be dangerous if the USA retains such a huge bargaining chip moving forward. 

 

Remember that it was the USA that invented networked communication but it was the English who invented HTML so we should get 50/50 split otherwise

HTML is awful, just like XML. If HTML had been more like JSON, it wouldn't be an issue.

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

HTML is awful, just like XML. If HTML had been more like JSON, it wouldn't be an issue.

Can't tell if joking or serious? 

 

The Web wouldn't exist at all without HTML, it was the language that literally spawned the web as we know it now. 

 

Tim Berners-Lee is regarded as the father of the web. 

[patrickjp93]

21 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Can't tell if joking or serious? 

 

The Web wouldn't exist at all without HTML, it was the language that literally spawned the web as we know it now. 

 

Tim Berners-Lee is regarded as the father of the web. 

Doesn't make it good. The Windows Start Button wasn't a good UI design. It was just the least bad option Microsoft came up with, and people got used to it. If you'd like an at-length proof of this, see Scott Meyer's talk on "the most important design guideline"

[Altecice]

17 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Doesn't make it good. The Windows Start Button wasn't a good UI design. It was just the least bad option Microsoft came up with, and people got used to it. If you'd like an at-length proof of this, see Scott Meyer's talk on "the most important design guideline"

Yes but you are arguing about HTML that is the founding language, Your analogy would need to go back to MSDOS to be accurate.

[Lurick]

The intertubes are doomed, we all gunna die!!!!!!

China will be h4x0rzing our freedoms away any minute now.

[Nowak]

For anyone who's afraid of what this means, let me tell you this:

It means nothing.

 

So what if a foreign entity were to seize control of the ICANN's root DNS servers? We can just make our own pool and use those instead. That's how the internet was designed, to not be dependent on any one thing.

[Briggsy]

10 minutes ago, Lurick said:

The intertubes are doomed, we all gunna die!!!!!!

China will be h4x0rzing our freedoms away any minute now.

Don't worry. Hillary will get elected and get on the task of securing America's servers so they can't be hacked by foreign entities. 

[CtW]

Yay another news topic about something that isn't really going to have much of an effect on the vast majority of internet users but can easily be interpreted as giving the internet to Russia!

[jasonvp]

28 minutes ago, Daring said:

So what if a foreign entity were to seize control of the ICANN's root DNS servers?

The root servers aren't owned or controlled by ICANN.  Rather they're owned, operated, and donated by a number of organizations (be they companies, schools, etc).

 

"Making our own pool" won't work, either.  Every DNS server across the 'net would have to know to point to these new roots.  And those roots would have to have the SOAs for every, single TLD in existence (eg: .net, .com, .edu, .org, .gov, .uk, etc).  It's a far harder thing to do than you might think.

[Nowak]

8 minutes ago, jasonvp said:

The root servers aren't owned or controlled by ICANN.  Rather they're owned, operated, and donated by a number of organizations (be they companies, schools, etc).

 

"Making our own pool" won't work, either.  Every DNS server across the 'net would have to know to point to these new roots.  And those roots would have to have the SOAs for every, single TLD in existence (eg: .net, .com, .edu, .org, .gov, .uk, etc).  It's a far harder thing to do than you might think.

True, but I was simplifying things so people who don't really understand how the internet works could understand a bit easier. Maybe I oversimplified things a bit.

[tobben]

Moved to general discussion, as the

thread currently doesn't meet the

guidelines for the news section.

 

[GSTARR]

7 hours ago, wcreek said:

I think there might be some justifications but idk.

I meant to agree with you not say that it was funny lmao

[patrickjp93]

8 hours ago, Altecice said:

Yes but you are arguing about HTML that is the founding language, Your analogy would need to go back to MSDOS to be accurate.

No it wouldn't. The interface is difficult to use correctly and easy to screw up, period. The analogy is just fine because it's based in principle, not merely similarity to another problem.