US will maintain control of Internet after Sept 2006

[Stapel]

If so, there will be a split-off. We will have two (or more) nets, that will still be linked together.

Hardly news to be mentioned.

 

[Keirador]

I was expecting a lot of anti-US, "this-is-the-worst-thing-human-history-has-ever-witnessed", sort of reactionary crap to this thread, but I must say I'm impressed. Nothing is changing. The US is just keeping control of it's own invention. If you're all OK with using the Internet now (and methinks you are) then you shouldn't really have a terrible problem with this announcement.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

I was expecting a lot of anti-US, "this-is-the-worst-thing-human-history-has-ever-witnessed", sort of reactionary crap to this thread, but I must say I'm impressed. Nothing is changing. The US is just keeping control of it's own invention. If you're all OK with using the Internet now (and methinks you are) then you shouldn't really have a terrible problem with this announcement.

While the initial networks were based in the US and developed by the US Gov, the idea of inter-conectivity was not new. Phone companies had it decades before it. We can say the US built the first infrastructure, but by no means did the US invent the Internet (well, Al Gore might have ) . The Internet became what is it today when it was released from the sole custody of the USA. That's what it is, an inter-connection of networks.

 

[Grisu]

I was expecting a lot of anti-US, "this-is-the-worst-thing-human-history-has-ever-witnessed", sort of reactionary crap to this thread, but I must say I'm impressed. Nothing is changing. The US is just keeping control of it's own invention. If you're all OK with using the Internet now (and methinks you are) then you shouldn't really have a terrible problem with this announcement.

huh? are we reading the same thread? most posters so far seem to agree that this is no big deal. I don't see where you get the 'everybody-hates-the-us-feeling' from.
As AT said, the first net was set up in the US, the Internet as it is today as it is today is a global achievment, IMHO Furthermore, what about the www? would you be ok, if switzerland solely controlled the www, since it was developped here?

 

[Xen]

And please refrain from knee-jerk "Evil neocons will stop at nothing" crap, I'm looking for insight, not indignant flaming.

well, its true you know

 

[Stile]

IglooDude: Did you edit that article before posting? I thought it was interesting that the newspaper didn't capitalize Internet where your quote of them does. Just curious, is capitalization of 'Internet' universally gramatically correct?

I agree with most posters that this isn't a bid deal. Most root servers are currently physically located outside the US and while they are authoritative they are rarely needed.

 

[col]

I used to think that Tim Berners-Lee had something to do with inventing the WWW at CERN.

 

[stormbind]

They innovated or implemented it. The Internet is the name of a specific network (hence the capitol letter). The low-level technology of sending data between computers over an arbitrary physical network existed before the Internet.

 

[Yom]

It's not a change, it's keeping things the same.

It's a change in plans, though.

 

[farting bob]

Im a big fan of not liking bush / USA politics, but all i can say is 'meh'. This shouldnt change a thing, and the system is currently working fine, so no need to change it. If they started policing and bullying the internet, i might change my mind and go for a UN or international group which no 1 country having more control than others.

 

[Stile]

I don't think an international or UN group would provide stability and security. I would much rather the US give up whatever control it has to some other stable democracy in a relatively secure part of the world, such as UK or France. I wouldn't be surprised if the UN took over if they wouldn't try to implement some global tax.

 

[EdwardTking]

If the US is volunteering to continue to provide the Internet's
master DNS directory for free, then I must express my surprise.

They have not adopted the usual US position of charging (yet).


The second point is that world governments can run their own
country-code domains (like .uk for the UK or .de for Germany).

Fine by me.

And the fourth that "there is no one venue to
appropriately address [Internet governance] in its entirety

This can be read many ways, not necessarily hostile to the UN.
For instance "no one venue" could meet not the US government.


The way I see it, they can not agree what to do; so they
are just carrying on as before and heiling Bush to flatter him.

 

[stormbind]

While the initial networks were based in the US and developed by the US Gov, the idea of inter-conectivity was not new. Phone companies had it decades before it. We can say the US built the first infrastructure, but by no means did the US invent the Internet (well, Al Gore might have ) . The Internet became what is it today when it was released from the sole custody of the USA. That's what it is, an inter-connection of networks.

Actually, the initial networks were developed by the UK government.

The Internet was derived from the USAF, USN and US Army having incompatible networks and needing interoperability

What we use today is a very well designed innovation, that was required to overcome one massive and stupid blunder. In other words, a crisis project.

The reason the Internet has been so succeful, compared with similar networks, is that it is 100% extensible (which was part of the design concept) and new technologies can be added without redesigning the core = low cost maintenance.

It was a good network design, but it was not an invention.

 

[stormbind]

I used to think that Tim Berners-Lee had something to do with inventing the WWW at CERN.

Sir Tim Berners-Lee (I know him, sort of) created the WWW which runs ontop of the Internet. We benefit from both ideas.

The WWW could run on any network. He came up with the idea of HTML but I do not know what else he did - his achievements intimidate me

 

[Speedo]

Eh, sounds like good motivation for somebody else to make alternate DNS servers. We probably need them anyway.

 

[CruddyLeper]

I for one am happy for America to retain control of DNS for the foreseeable future.

First, freedom of speech and expression is maintained better nowhere else. I think.

Second, the nihilist in me welcomes security measures designed by Americans.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

deleted.......

 

[SeleucusNicator]

If Bush wants to win bipartisan support for his policies, after the 2006 reorganization he should appoint Al Gore President of the Internet.

 

[farting bob]

If Bush wants to win bipartisan support for his policies, after the 2006 reorganization he should appoint Al Gore President of the Internet.

Imagine how boring and predictable the internet would become if that happened...

 

[Elrohir]

"Annexes internet"? Talk about being overly dramatic. The US isn't annexing the internet, they are just saying they want to keep it the way it is for now. I don't see the problem, I mean if we want to foot the bill and keep it running, why do you care? (Besides, we invented it )