Obama administration has moved quietly to cede control of the Web from the United States to foreign powers. (security)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Internet is an American invention. It is critical to freedom, liberty, and even our national security. Why would a President of the United States take steps to turn it over to foreign bodies? This is crazy.
Obama is dangerous to our security, and should be removed from office. He is not acting in the best interests of the United States. What else will he do to harm us?
I dont see any report on this, anywhere, except Newsmax and other RW blogs that copied the Newsmax article.
I think the Internet has been shared successfully with the worldwide community, while under control by the U.S.
What do you mean, "too big for America to control"? Do you mean we shouldn't control something which we invented? Ridiculous.
America doesn't need to police everything, it's like the one major complaint absolutely everyone has. This is no different, and as someone that makes his livin off that internet I'd say that it's far too large of a network for any one country to control, that's the beauty of it.
I'm also surprised that you trust the US gov't to monitor/control internet activity but in all probability don't trust them to monitor/control many other things.
I'm also surprised that you trust the US gov't to monitor/control internet activity but in all probability don't trust them to monitor/control many other things.
Though this has been something that has been talked about for well over a year (at least), it only happened recently, and I did do some further research today (still more to do). Based on that, I am even more convinced that this was a very stupid move on behalf of our "president".
Foreign interests are looking to tax the internet, and to control content. In other words, if they do not like what is being said about their government, they want censorship privelidges.
Nothing good will come of this. This could change the Internet forever. We do not need a PBS like Internet. It should be free and open, and not subject to taxation by foreign entities.
Bad move, Obama, which is why, "You stink, sir"!
I too would like some further information on this subject. But if this is too happen, i don't see how this can be a good thing. Do you have another link, that can direct me to current info on this matter. Thanks for the info.
Making it international is preventive, not a cause of action. It prevents any one government getting too much control over a tool that holds such importance.
What country is suffering from the U.S. being the dominant force in the Internet?
- I would suggest none.
Compared with today, what county would suffer most with the Internet being controlled by an international consortium?
- I would suggest the United States.
And I would suggest that if you have a problem with the more sinister elements of the Internet then you should just avoid them. Use your parental rights to protect your children. Don't weild those rights over me.
I dont see any report on this, anywhere, except Newsmax and other RW blogs that copied the Newsmax article.
Do you have a link to a news source?
It's Newsmax - not entirely a lie, but certainly not the whole truth.
IANA doesn't "control the Internet". It's the organization that handles IP address assignment (together with the regional authorities - RIPE, ARIN etc.), top-level domains (.gov, .com, .us etc.) and port numbers.
They've also been involved in settling domain name disputes. The last task in particular has been annoying for overseas companies - imagine, say, two German companies disagreeing over a domain name, yet having no authority but a Californian non-profit to appeal to?
Handing IANA's responsibilities to an international body (like ITU-T for telecommunications) has been discussed for years now - way before Obama took office.
The thing is, people don't have to abide by the IANA - the "control" is illusory, because it's mostly voluntary. The Internet is basically a collection of lines, routers and servers - and many, if not most, of those are not owned or controlled by American companies. It's very practical to have a top-level authority, but if the ISPs of Europe or China were to find IANA too cumbersome (or even hostile), technically they could quite easily institute their own top-level domains and IANA wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it. Of course, this would mean a partially fractured Internet, something worth avoiding.
Governance of the Internet was never formally decided - IANA used to be a one-man operation.
As anyone having read this far without eyes glazing over can tell, you really have to work to make this worth having the slightest bit of argument over. Newsmax is making hay about governance over an engineering standards organization.
All I want to know is, how does this effect national security??? Someone please tell me??
Yes please, that would be nice to know.
How on earth could this affect the national security of the US?
I'd like to hear rationally stated arguments with reliable links to back up the data used therein, and not just vague 'foreign powers will control us because obama is a socialist' rants.
Thanks in advance
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
