D.C. Watson: Hey, step off. Go build your own Internet!

Dhimmi Watch.org ^ | October 16, 2005 | DC Watson

[CindyDawg]

Another reason why I'm glad we don't have a Jimmy Carter in the WH.

[paudio]

Yeah.. I think the legal sanctions may work... Technically, as I said before, I think it's possible for any country today to block the internet. Afterall, the Chinese has been doing it...

[Prime Choice]

Great. Let's let the U.N. turn the World Wide Web into the Third World Wide Web!

[MortMan]

How do you prevent collision of IP addresses from the existing net? I'm not trying to be sarcastic, just pointing out that there are parts of the net that need some handholding (AMERICAN hyandholding, of course).

[Prime Choice]

What the U.N. wants control of are all the backbone servers. And yes, with that, they can indeed control access to any part of the Internet.

Personally, I don't think that association of tinpot dictators and their lapdogs should be allowed within 100 yards of any part of the Internet. They've already clearly demonstrated that they are not capable of appreciating true liberty or respecting real rights.

[antiRepublicrat]

If the UN did take the internet, there would be nothing to take, the internet is made up of privately owned servers and websites and hosts. Everyone would just leave and someone would open up a private internet and people would jion that one.

They want the root DNS servers and probably control over IP address assignment.

[botsnack]

I'm not a big fan of the UN administration, but I also see potential problems with a separatist attitude from the US that might lead to a rejection of foreign innovation.

Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web while working for CERN, a European particle physics laboratory. The US created the physical infrastructure and continues to be responsible for most of the administration, but we shouldn't let our pride blind us to the contributions that those outside of our country have made.

The Internet was meant to be a global medium, and it would be a mistake to allow it to splinter. I believe the Internet is the key to helping countries like China with oppressive regimes achieve their own freedom. The Internet is far too important to the development of the free world to allow politics to interfere.

[Prime Choice]

I also see potential problems with a separatist attitude from the US that might lead to a rejection of foreign innovation.

That's nonsense. The Open Source community crosses all ideological and political boundaries. You think all Open Source coders are going to magically stop collaborating if the U.N. doesn't wrest control of the Internet from the U.S.?? Please.

[rlmorel]

"...The Internet is far too important to the development of the free world to allow politics to interfere."

Well put...that is why, we as Americans, can NEVER allow the EU or UN or anyone else to control it...if we keep it in our hands, it is more likely to remain free and open than if it ends up in the hands of say, Belgium or France.

[antiRepublicrat]

How do you prevent collision of IP addresses from the existing net?

Conflicting IP addresses won't matter if they have a completely separate net. Other than that, we're talking IP address assignment as is currently done by ARIN (us), RIPE (Europe), plus ones for Africa, Asia and Latin America, all of whom assign IP blocks in their own geographic area. IIRC, there is even political wrangling over that, since we have the bulk of them (duh, we invented it), but that should go away with IPv6.

If they were mad enough, they could set up their own DNS root server, and places such as Europe and China would gladly force their ISPs to switch to the new root. Then the Internet would be fragmented as far as the names people type into the address bar, or where most clicked links go.

[Pox]

Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web while working for CERN, a European particle physics laboratory.

In August 1991, Tim Berners-Lee created the first website.

His contribution was derived from the existing infrastructure that had already been in place for decades thanks to the US.

There's nothing wrong with innovation coming from any corner of the globe, however, future possibilities regarding such innovations can never usurp the primary reasons behind our insistence that the UN or some other such corrupt entity, such as Communist or Socialist or Totalitarian governments, never be allowed to gain jurisdiction over this medium. The end result would simply kill the Internet as it is and "innovations" would be irrelevant.

[Desron13]

"Let's see if these turkeys can go it alone,,, without our [the US taxpayer] help. They'll last about a month."

What a joke! Who in their right mind would want to surf the content on an islamofaciest Internet let alone actually pay for the dubious privilege?

[tertiary01]

When I quit AOL the argument to try to keep me on was that I would no longer be on the INTERNET because it was made up of five companies, I remember him mentioning AOL, Earthlink, I think Internic and MSN, and one other. He said without subscription to one of the five I would merely have access to the World Wide Web.

I'm confused!

[Mr_Peter]

Can't figure out why ANYONE would be a member of AOL. Do they offer anything worth having?

[tertiary01]

Just lots and lots of ads for worthless Time-Warner products.

[satchmodog9]

Under the current system, the UN cannot control or regulate(read tax ) the Internet. If they get their way they sure could.

[TChris]

Paragraphs are your friends.

[TChris]

Conflicting IP addresses won't matter if they have a completely separate net. Other than that, we're talking IP address assignment as is currently done by ARIN (us), RIPE (Europe), plus ones for Africa, Asia and Latin America, all of whom assign IP blocks in their own geographic area. IIRC, there is even political wrangling over that, since we have the bulk of them (duh, we invented it), but that should go away with IPv6.

It still seems to me that IPv6 is unnecessary. If large blocks of "legal" IPs weren't horded by companies, my employer being one of them, for internal networks, then there should be plenty of IPv4 addresses available. Technologies like NAT and dynamic addressing (DHCP) should make IPv4 work just fine for a long, long time.