triniwebdiva's community profile
My comments
-
Turn your point around
And see exactly how other countries feel! THeior telecomms, their banking system, all have to run on the Internet, and the US can (not that it has ever, but it COULD) suddenly shut it down and commit economic warfare. And the US certainly isn't a pacifist nation, having invaded countries from as small as Grenada (60,000 people)
I would feel more comfortable letting Switzerland or Sweden run it if it had to be ONE country - at least they haven't warred with anyone lately.
However, the concept is that ALL coutries would have a voice, so no one country could use it as a weapon!
And wher is this TAX thing coming from?July 14, 2005
-
Turn your point around
And see exactly how other countries feel! THeior telecomms, their banking system, all have to run on the Internet, and the US can (not that it has ever, but it COULD) suddenly shut it down and commit economic warfare. And the US certainly isn't a pacifist nation, having invaded countries from as small as Grenada (60,000 people)
I would feel more comfortable letting Switzerland or Sweden run it if it had to be ONE country - at least they haven't warred with anyone lately.
However, the concept is that ALL coutries would have a voice, so no one country could use it as a weapon!
And wher is this TAX thing coming from?July 14, 2005
-
No country based thier argument solely on SPAM
There were 41 issues discussed over 8 months. How can you take a complex negotiating position and reduce it to one sound bite and feel justified in criticising based on that?
Read ALL the submissions, verbal, written, posted online and then analyse the position. Cause then you'd KNOW what the position is and what it's based on!July 14, 2005
-
No country based thier argument solely on SPAM
There were 41 issues discussed over 8 months. How can you take a complex negotiating position and reduce it to one sound bite and feel justified in criticising based on that?
Read ALL the submissions, verbal, written, posted online and then analyse the position. Cause then you'd KNOW what the position is and what it's based on!July 14, 2005
-
Tax? Where's that?
I seem not to have read the same material as many people on this discussion. I have not heard anywhere in the UN a proposal to tax the Internet. Simply a proposal to have other countries allowed input into the basic policy re management of what has become (like it or not) an INTERNATIONAL resource. Many of the root servers reside OUTSIDE the US. More and more content and content servers reside OUTSIDE the US. More and more users are NOT US. Why not let them have a say in running it? Or is democracy only for US citizens and if it suits US goals?July 14, 2005
-
Tax? Where's that?
I seem not to have read the same material as many people on this discussion. I have not heard anywhere in the UN a proposal to tax the Internet. Simply a proposal to have other countries allowed input into the basic policy re management of what has become (like it or not) an INTERNATIONAL resource. Many of the root servers reside OUTSIDE the US. More and more content and content servers reside OUTSIDE the US. More and more users are NOT US. Why not let them have a say in running it? Or is democracy only for US citizens and if it suits US goals?July 14, 2005
-
So - ICANN stays under all 4 models of the report
A leaked copy of the report is available here:
http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=3DAB967F-10AC-4EE0-A090-82CEE524452A
Read it and see where it says that ICANN is going away. Even the most radical proposal keeps ICANN, but changes and reformulates it.
The main issue is and has always been unilateral US control of the root zone file, which is seen as an international resource. Plain and simple.
Content ownership, local culture - all that is important, but not the main issue.July 14, 2005
0 replies
-
So - ICANN stays under all 4 models of the report
A leaked copy of the report is available here:
http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=3DAB967F-10AC-4EE0-A090-82CEE524452A
Read it and see where it says that ICANN is going away. Even the most radical proposal keeps ICANN, but changes and reformulates it.
The main issue is and has always been unilateral US control of the root zone file, which is seen as an international resource. Plain and simple.
Content ownership, local culture - all that is important, but not the main issue.July 14, 2005
0 replies
-
Where did we get that ICANN is going anywhere?
The Economist has a draft copy of the WGIG report. Just read an article from there. ICANN is more likely than not going anywhere. I wonder (yet again) where all this is coming from? From all of the meetings that I attended, it was clear from the beginning that there was strong sentiment to separate the technical aspects (ICANN) from the policy aspects (DoC /UN) - as such, ICANN will stay, but probably under an International policy group replacing the US DoC. What's wrong with that?July 12, 2005
-
Where did we get that ICANN is going anywhere?
The Economist has a draft copy of the WGIG report. Just read an article from there. ICANN is more likely than not going anywhere. I wonder (yet again) where all this is coming from? From all of the meetings that I attended, it was clear from the beginning that there was strong sentiment to separate the technical aspects (ICANN) from the policy aspects (DoC /UN) - as such, ICANN will stay, but probably under an International policy group replacing the US DoC. What's wrong with that?July 12, 2005
- Popular topics
- Apple iPhone
- Apple iPod
- Cell phones
- CES 2010
- GPS
- LCD TV
- CNET sites
- CNET Site map
- CNET TV
- Downloads
- News
- Reviews
- Shopper.com
- More information
- Newsletters
- CNET Mobile
- Customer Help Center
- RSS
- CNET API
- About CNET
-
TOP PRODUCTS FROM TOP BRANDS
