NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, this is the first thread I've ever created so I hope it isn't a duplicate.

Looks like the US Government has finaly done the decent thing...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/27/ntia_icann_meeting/


The whole affair had me kind of worried for a while.

Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.

Typical.

when was the US the ultimate authority on the internet?

Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.

Typical.

Hey, you can't make the official language Swedish until I finish learning it.

Babelfish just isn't going to cut it for most people.

Is this a good thing? And does it affect the 'Net Neutrality debate?

Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.

Typical.

If it wasn't English, it would probably be German.

My German sucks so I find it hard to be overly concerned about that :P



Is this a good thing? And does it affect the 'Net Neutrality debate?

I think that the whole net neutrality thing would only be a problem for Americans.

It's been deemed unfeasible/impossible to implement that kind of traffic shaping anyway.

when was the US the ultimate authority on the internet?
Since ARPANET.

Since ARPANET.
ARPANET = The US Invented The Internet

Is this a good thing? And does it affect the 'Net Neutrality debate?
Maybe and not really.

Is this a good thing? And does it affect the 'Net Neutrality debate?
It's totally separate. That's about whether US telecom companies can charge for sending certain types of data - one is an issue of software protocols, the other is an issue of hardware infrastructure.

ARPANET = The US Invented The Internet
Pretty much, yes.

ARPANET = The US Invented The Internet

thats news to me

ARPANET = The US Invented The Internet
Yes, but a British man invented the World Wide Web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

thats news to me
It was a creation of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

The whole idea behind IP protocol was to provide the US with an alternate means of automatically re-routed communications in the event of nuclear war.

The coddling of university professors in this endeavor was purely a sideshow that blossomed into benefits for civilian use of the network.

Yes, but a British man invented the World Wide Web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

Wouldn't be a WWW without the underlying stack.

thats news to me
Perhaps you might like to read one of the many hundreds of books on the history of the internet.

Wouldn't be a WWW without the underlying stack.
But such foundations would be irrelevant without the building above.

It was a creation of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

The whole idea behind IP protocol was to provide the US with an alternate means of automatically re-routed communications in the event of nuclear war.

The coddling of university professors in this endeavor was purely a sideshow that blossomed into benefits for civilian use of the network.

hmm well it seems that they did invent the internet, but it looks like to me that they actually lost control of it years ago

hmm well it seems that they did invent the internet, but it looks like to me that they actually lost control of it years ago

They deliberately handed it over after putting up SIPRNET.

Can't have civilians on a DoD network that will actually be used, you know.

Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.

Typical.
Might I remind you that English is the language for international business.

What the hell is your problem Baguetten?

Wouldn't be a WWW without the underlying stack.
The Web could work on a range of underlying infrastructure. It's just HTTP that ties it to TCP/IP.

Perhaps you might like to read one of the many hundreds of books on the history of the internet.

id rather not, but i have been educated on the subject by the lovely users of NSG

Might I remind you that English is the language for international business.

What the hell is your problem Baguetten?

Perhaps if there were more Swedes in the world, there would be a greater demand for Swedish as the "official" language of anything.

Baguetten, you need to make more babies. Make more Swedes.

But such foundations would be irrelevant without the building above.
There were a lot of buildings on top of those foundations long before the www. Email, usenet, gopher, archie, ftp, etc. The www is simply a graphical/hypertext interface for the internet, which helped make the internet very popular by simplifying its use. That doesn't mean the internet would be useless without it.

Might I remind you that English is the language for international business.

What the hell is your problem Baguetten?
Maybe he's noticed that despite the many businesses operating on the Internet, it is not primarily a business platform but a tool for communication between private citizens. Chinese speakers form a large and ever increasing portion of the internet, and it is ridiculous to ignore then (this is what is leading to China threatening to run a parallel DNS system to allow it to have fully Mandarin domain names).

hmm well it seems that they did invent the internet, but it looks like to me that they actually lost control of it years ago
Not really. At any moment they could have flipped a switch and shut it down.

Might I remind you that English is the language for international business.

What the hell is your problem Baguetten?

Why is it though? I still prefer German :P

Why is it though? I still prefer German :P
Those crazy Brits and Yankee traders.

Maybe he's noticed that despite the many businesses operating on the Internet, it is not primarily a business platform but a tool for communication between private citizens. Chinese speakers form a large and ever increasing portion of the internet, and it is ridiculous to ignore then (this is what is leading to China threatening to run a parallel DNS system to allow it to have fully Mandarin domain names).

Well, with IPv6, there are so many available addresses, I fail to see why you can't have the DNS in all languages. You're just mapping to character sets.

Now, you would have to have your OS set to use a Mandarin keyboard to type in a Mandarin address...

Not really. At any moment they could have flipped a switch and shut it down.
How so? Sure, they can kill the root DNS servers, but we would still be able to rout everything around by IP address. Plus it'd make the internet like it was back in the good ol' days, before most people could understand it.

Why is it though? I still prefer German :P
That'll teach them for losing WW2. :-)

Knowing who the original sponsors of this movement to "take the internet away from the US" were, this is far from reassuring. Iran, Cuba and China were some of the original states to hop on board. The Europeans just joined up to spite the US.

Knowing who the original sponsors of this movement to "take the internet away from the US" were, this is far from reassuring. Iran, Cuba and China were some of the original states to hop on board. The Europeans just joined up to spite the US.
So what your saying is, if the internet isn't controled by the US, then the terrorists have won (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_terrorists_have_won)?

Might I remind you that English is the language for international business.

Actually, no. Anyone who thinks that will see their business fail miserably in any other market than an English-speaking one.

What the hell is your problem Baguetten?

That none - not a single one of them - had any other first language than English. That means they were all from English-speaking countries. Not a single a Chinese, not a single Indian, not a single German, not a single Japanese, not a single anything except someone who comes from an English-speaking country.

The article dubbed it correctly - parochialism. And that, who ever you are, is what I have a hell of a problem with.

Actually, no. Anyone who thinks that will see their business fail miserably in any other market than an English-speaking one.
Hence Google's difficulty when it finally moved into China and met its match in Baidu.

Perhaps if there were more Swedes in the world, there would be a greater demand for Swedish as the "official" language of anything.

I don't want a single language to be the language of anything. I want as many as possible.

Baguetten, you need to make more babies. Make more Swedes.

No, thanks.

Baguetten, you need to make more babies. Make more Swedes.
You don't make swedes, you grow them in the garden.

Hence Google's difficulty when it finally moved into China and met its match in Baidu.

Not to mention it quivering before the awoken Chinese Dragon and scurrying to do business the Chinese way.

So what your saying is, if the internet isn't controled by the US, then the terrorists have won (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_terrorists_have_won)?
That was the last thing I was concerned about when dealing with this program. As it stands, China, Cuba and Iran have a vested interest in sealing their countries off from any material that makes claims counter to their official government beliefs. They have erected firewalls and limited access to sites they don't like, but, as per the fact that the internet was under the 'control' of the US, they couldn't completely seal themselves off. There are several ways of doing this.

Not to mention it quivering before the awoken Chinese Dragon and scurrying to do business the Chinese way.
Not really. It's more like salivating at the billions of dollars that they could earn by doing business in China.

That was the last thing I was concerned about when dealing with this program. As it stands, China, Cuba and Iran have a vested interest in sealing their countries off from any material that makes claims counter to their official government beliefs. They have erected firewalls and limited access to sites they don't like, but, as per the fact that the internet was under the 'control' of the US, they couldn't completely seal themselves off. There are several ways of doing this.
Please explain. I don't see how who has overall control makes a difference.

Actually, no. Anyone who thinks that will see their business fail miserably in any other market than an English-speaking one.

Generally, when dealing with international business, deference is shown to the English language speakers, because of the centrality to the global economy of countries that speak English for the past century.

Not really. It's more like salivating at the billions of dollars that they could earn by doing business in China.

Those billions are the Chinese Dragon, and thinking you are going to be able to dictate business terms and do so in English and have them stand for it, well, let's just say Google saw how stillborn that was.

Please explain. I don't see how who has overall control makes a difference.
If you have your own servers, you can cut physically cut them off from external networks, and still maintain the integrity of your own private network. Which was not the case previously.

Generally, when dealing with international business, deference is shown to the English language speakers, because of the centrality to the global economy of countries that speak English for the past century.

You really think that someone trying to sell China or Germany something try to do so in English and English alone, and are successful in it? Yeah, right.

Generally, when dealing with international business, deference is shown to the English language speakers, because of the centrality to the global economy of countries that speak English for the past century.
THANK YOU!

And and Baguette, I'm a Randian style capitalist: Produce or perish.

And and Baguette, I'm a Randian style capitalist

Thank you for sharing that info, making it even easier to dismiss you.

Those billions are the Chinese Dragon, and thinking you are going to be able to dictate business terms and do so in English and have them stand for it, well, let's just say Google saw how stillborn that was.
It's the fact that they're salivating, not trembling you fool. Google is confident of its position with or without China, but China has the potential to make a lot of Americans really, really rich. When one trembles one gets down on one's knees and begs, when one salivates, one jumps forward to get that delightful piece of food.

You really think that someone trying to sell China or Germany something try to do so in English and English alone, and are successful in it? Yeah, right.
You're being a fool. I'm not talking about marketing. I'm talking about business. The processes that are involved in making the good or providing the service.

It's the fact that they're salivating, not trembling you fool. Google is confident of its position with or without China, but China has the potential to make a lot of Americans really, really rich. When one trembles one gets down on one's knees and begs, when one salivates, one jumps forward to get that delightful piece of food.

They tremble because of their salivation. If China had nothing they wanted, they wouldn't give two shits about it. It just so happens to be that China is very, very desirable to them and to make sure they can satiate their thirst brought upon by their salivation, they will tremble before the whims of the person who owns the well they so much want to drink out of. So, they do tremble because they know they aren't the only ones courting their sino-mistress.

Thank you for sharing that info, making it even easier to dismiss you.
Why?

Why?

"Randian." 'Nuff said.

If you have your own servers, you can cut physically cut them off from external networks, and still maintain the integrity of your own private network. Which was not the case previously.
If they don't want to have any connection to the internet, they can run a separate national network anyway.

It's the fact that they're salivating, not trembling you fool. Google is confident of its position with or without China, but China has the potential to make a lot of Americans really, really rich.
China is a far bigger potential market than the US and Europe combined. If Google can't beat Baidu soon, Baidu will one day become more powerful than it, and that it what Google fears.

If they don't want to have any connection to the internet, they can run a separate national network anyway.
They're trying to be subtle about it. They don't want seem too boldfaced.

They tremble because of their salivation. If China had nothing they wanted, they wouldn't give two shits about it. It just so happens to be that China is very, very desirable to them and to make sure they can satiate their thirst brought upon by their salivation, they will tremble before the whims of the person who owns the well they so much want to drink out of. So, they do tremble because they know they aren't the only ones courting their sino-mistress.
They can satiate their thirst elsewhere, but China is like a delightful pastry. It's a bonus.

I don't want a single language to be the language of anything. I want as many as possible.
Well that’s just inefficient, and it really doesn’t make much sense. The fewer languages there are, the more likely two people are to share a common one.

Yes, but a British man invented the World Wide Web.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

In a Swiss lab :P


The good thing about English speaking people controlling the internet is they probably won't come up with any more abominations like allowing umlauts in domain names. Not that I'd ever seen any DN with an umlaut so far.

In a Swiss lab :P


The good thing about English speaking people controlling the internet is they probably won't come up with any more abominations like allowing umlauts in domain names. Not that I'd ever seen any DN with an umlaut so far.
European Lab, actually.

European Lab, actually.
Well, yeah. But it being near Geneva, I still consider it my personal property :P

But such foundations would be irrelevant without the building above.

Usenet is irrelevant then? Email is irrelevant then? FTP is irrelevant then?

The internet is larger than the Web.

Well, yeah. But being near Geneva, I still consider it my personal property :P
You're Swiss?

Do you know if it's possible for people who are of demonstrably Swiss descent to get a Swiss passport?

Not really. At any moment they could have flipped a switch and shut it down.

Actually, no. One of the whole points of the ARPANET project from which the internet grew was to create a system which would route around damage - nuke one computer or one network, and the rest continue working merrily along.

You're Swiss?

Do you know if it's possible for people who are of demonstrably Swiss descent to get a Swiss passport?

Hmm, dunno. I guess that would depend on how far back this descent is... I do know, however, that it takes quite a few years of living here to be able to apply if you have no Swiss descent. Then you'd actually have to apply for the citizenship in a town (afaik), not the state as such. So I guess you would also have to demonstrate which city your familiy actually came from... but that's just guessing.

Maybe you'll find something here http://www.admin.ch. I wasn't successful at all with my full text search (using "passport", "citizenship", and some German words), but maybe you have more success.

Well that’s just inefficient, and it really doesn’t make much sense. The fewer languages there are, the more likely two people are to share a common one.
Efficiently isn't the soul concern for a language. People still study languages like Ancient Greek in order to read its poetry without having to settle for a translation. While it would be nice if there was a common langauge everyone can speak, that doesn't mean that it's good for the other languages to die out completely.

It's totally separate. That's about whether US telecom companies can charge for sending certain types of data - one is an issue of software protocols, the other is an issue of hardware infrastructure.
Not really it is all about software protocalls

While they are different parts and there are some servers are involved the DNS hirarchy is a logical rather then a phisical one

But such foundations would be irrelevant without the building above.
Most of the traffic on the internet is NOT web traffic … actually from what I have seen Torrent and FTP make up the biggest chunk

That and HTTP can arguably be seperated from the “Web” as well

In the end there is more to the internet then web pages.

Not really it is all about software protocalls
Unless an encrypted protocol is used for all transmission, it will be possible for telecom companies to offer a differential service regardless of who is on overall control of the internet.

Unless an encrypted protocol is used for all transmission, it will be possible for telecom companies to offer a differential service regardless of who is on overall control of the internet.
That I know I was just saying both are example of software or logical systems rather then a “Hardware” solution

That and HTTP can arguably be seperated from the “Web” as well


Eh? Did you intend to write something other than HTTP there? The web is HTTP, is it not (although not all of it, and not all HTTP is on the web, but the overlap is great between the two).

Eh? Did you intend to write something other than HTTP there? The web is HTTP, is it not (although not all of it, and not all HTTP is on the web, but the overlap is great between the two).
The web is the collection of files served over HTTP. The web could run on another protocol (and maybe one day it will, although it's more likely that HTTP will just be upgraded again).

The web is the collection of files served over HTTP. The web could run on another protocol (and maybe one day it will, although it's more likely that HTTP will just be upgraded again).

I beg to differ, the web is not just a bunch of files, but rather the structure by which they are delivered.

If we were to change all the files served over HTTP the Web would remain, but if we changed the structure of delivery the Web would have been altered.

What you are claiming is like claiming that international banking is just a load of bars of gold, other valuables or promisary notes, and not the network by which they are retained, transfered and accounted for.

Well that’s just inefficient, and it really doesn’t make much sense.

Let me guess, you're monolingual?

Let me guess, you're monolingual?

I think somebody needs a blowjob...

I think somebody needs a blowjob...

Rimjobs are better.

Eh? Did you intend to write something other than HTTP there? The web is HTTP, is it not (although not all of it, and not all HTTP is on the web, but the overlap is great between the two).
You are right I just further going into it ... it is the protocall used by the web but it is just a protocall the web COULD have used the FTP protocall or MTP or something else on the session layer

I beg to differ, the web is not just a bunch of files, but rather the structure by which they are delivered.

If we were to change all the files served over HTTP the Web would remain, but if we changed the structure of delivery the Web would have been altered.

What you are claiming is like claiming that international banking is just a load of bars of gold, other valuables or promisary notes, and not the network by which they are retained, transfered and accounted for.
But it’s a logical idea of organization

For example you could have a banking system where EVERYTHING was moved in cars … or trucks … or train. Or electronic or a combination. It still would be a banking system just may not be as efficient (or maybe more efficient)

It is more the logical organization then it is the actual transport it is on (besides for efficiency sake)

About the only thing the web really could not do without is DNS or some equivalent (at least on any practical scale)

:(
i should have started a country and volenteered to "host" the internet
:(

But it’s a logical idea of organization

Indeed, the point I was making here was that the web, or for that matter international banking, was defined by structure, not content, contrary to what Salfara was claiming.

All Your Websites Are Belong To The Eu.

They deliberately handed it over after putting up SIPRNET.

Can't have civilians on a DoD network that will actually be used, you know.
Kinda funny you mention it. One of my jobs is to check clearances for military and civilians that need SIPRNET access. :) It's what I'd be doing right now if I wasn't already done for the day.

Indeed, the point I was making here was that the web, or for that matter international banking, was defined by structure, not content, contrary to what Salfara was claiming.
True that

They deliberately handed it over after putting up SIPRNET.

Can't have civilians on a DoD network that will actually be used, you know.
They are having some issues with SIPRNET though ... I cant say much it has to do with some of my consulting but expect some cool things in the future (if the outside ever hears of them)

Kinda funny you mention it. One of my jobs is to check clearances for military and civilians that need SIPRNET access. :) It's what I'd be doing right now if I wasn't already done for the day.
Woah cool I have never dealt with you front end guys before … fun work? (I know you can probably talk about it as much as I can)

Woah cool I have never dealt with you front end guys before … fun work? (I know you can probably talk about it as much as I can)
LOL, I'm bored off my ass. I've been wanting to go home for the last 3 hours, but my boss (a civilian) left before I got back from lunch, so I'm stuck here for another 1/2 hour. I have no work left, so I've been here. :D

LOL, I'm bored off my ass. I've been wanting to go home for the last 3 hours, but my boss (a civilian) left before I got back from lunch, so I'm stuck here for another 1/2 hour. I have no work left, so I've been here. :D
Ahhh I am a civie outside network/security expert consultant so we just deal with brainstorming through some improvements

They are having some issues with SIPRNET though ... I cant say much it has to do with some of my consulting but expect some cool things in the future (if the outside ever hears of them)
SIPRNET is cool. It's like the parallel universe on Star Trek. Everything is sort of the same, but different. And sinister. :D

SIPRNET is cool. It's like the parallel universe on Star Trek. Everything is sort of the same, but different. And sinister. :D
That it is ... your guises end is good (clearance management and phisical security) there are just some cool new things they want to try on the technical end

Not sure it will make a difference on your end but thats not my specalty

Ahhh I am a civie outside network/security expert consultant so we just deal with brainstorming through some improvements
Pledgeria's SIPRNET Improvement Suggestion: It needs a better search engine than Intellink Google. It really blows.

[/hijack] I got more, but they're not fit for discussion over NIPRNET.

That it is ... your guises end is good (clearance management and phisical security) there are just some cool new things they want to try on the technical end

Not sure it will make a difference on your end but thats not my specalty
:p

Pledgeria's SIPRNET Improvement Suggestion: It needs a better search engine than Intellink Google. It really blows.

[/hijack] I got more, but they're not fit for discussion over NIPRNET.
Well to be fair this is not really NIPRNET ... thats still for unclassified but sensitive information Unless you military guys call it something different then what I know it as

Well, this is the first thread I've ever created so I hope it isn't a duplicate.

Looks like the US Government has finaly done the decent thing...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/27/ntia_icann_meeting/


The whole affair had me kind of worried for a while.
Dream on. Those two things don't go together.

This will end badly.

Dream on. Those two things don't go together.
How so? this seems to be a step in the right direction ... not a big enough step but one none the less

How so? this seems to be a step in the right direction ... not a big enough step but one none the less
I think they realized that the internet should not be left in the hands of someone who thinks it is a series of tubes.

How so? this seems to be a step in the right direction ... not a big enough step but one none the less
US-decent. Uhuh.

I think they realized that the internet should not be left in the hands of someone who thinks it is a series of tubes.

Can I send you an Internet?

Can I send you an Internet?
I suppose so. I wonder how much they go for these days....

US-decent. Uhuh.
Sometimes … sometimes not

US-decent. Uhuh.
Which country are you discracefully representing?

Well, this is the first thread I've ever created so I hope it isn't a duplicate.

Looks like the US Government has finaly done the decent thing...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/27/ntia_icann_meeting/


The whole affair had me kind of worried for a while.
I like this statement by Bill Graham of Canada:

"The ICANN board needs to provide adequate minutes of all its meetings. There needs to be a notice of what issues will be considered, and the timeframe when a decision is made. A written document needs to be posted setting out the background and context of the issues. There needs to be an acknowledgment and a summary of the positions put forward by various interested parties; there needs to be an analysis of the issues; there needs to be an explanation of the decisions and the reasons for it; and ultimately there needs to be a mechanism for the board to be held accountable by its community."

What if they set a requirement that every single one of those who use an IP address had the right to vote on issues affecting the Internet? It could set a precedent for what might eventually become a worldwide electorate. :)

I think they realized that the internet should not be left in the hands of someone who thinks it is a series of tubes.
I personally don’t wish a country that puts pressure on ICANN to restrict domains based on some religious moral code to be in control. Like somehow having a single XXX domain makes more porn magically

They shot themselves in the foot with that one though you know how easy it would be for parents to check and filter obscene content out if it was all under a single domain. They just made it harder for parents not better

I like this statement by Bill Graham of Canada:

"The ICANN board needs to provide adequate minutes of all its meetings. There needs to be a notice of what issues will be considered, and the timeframe when a decision is made. A written document needs to be posted setting out the background and context of the issues. There needs to be an acknowledgment and a summary of the positions put forward by various interested parties; there needs to be an analysis of the issues; there needs to be an explanation of the decisions and the reasons for it; and ultimately there needs to be a mechanism for the board to be held accountable by its community."

What if they set a requirement that every single one of those who use an IP address had the right to vote on issues affecting the Internet? It could set a precedent for what might eventually become a worldwide electorate. :)
Not quite feasable but an intresting IDEA

Will be much easier when IPV6 is implemented

Which country are you discracefully representing?
I'm not 'discracefully'.

Sometimes … sometimes not
Mostly the latter.

I'm not 'discracefully'.
Heh! Looked in the mirror lately? :D

Heh! Looked in the mirror lately? :D
Your one to talk.

Mostly the latter.
Some see it that way … some choose to see how some of us are trying … you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion on internet control or are you just coming in to troll/bait those of us from the US?

Some see it that way … some choose to see how some of us are trying … you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion on internet control or are you just coming in to troll/bait those of us from the US?
You know the answer to that.

Some see it that way … some choose to see how some of us are trying …
But they are still a minority.
you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion on internet control or are you just coming in to troll/bait those of us from the US?
Yes. I don't believe the US is rendering anything. It's like dismanteling all nukes. But keep a few. Just in case. They almost admit it in the article.

You know the answer to that.
Yeah but the Socratic method (sorta) is more effective then yelling TROLL

More inventive and less ad-hominim as well in case this un inventive one is really just being his or her self.

But they are still a minority.

Yes. I don't believe the US is rendering anything. It's like dismanteling all nukes. But keep a few. Just in case. They almost admit it in the article.
There is no easy way to keep “Part” of a root level server … if the root goes they can forcefully over ride all domain level controllers (such as .com .net .edu) as they could redirect it to their own service

Yeah but the Socratic method (sorta) is more effective then yelling TROLL

More inventive and less ad-hominim as well in case this un inventive one is really just being his or her self.
Oh UT. Always a laugh with you.

Yeah but the Socratic method (sorta) is more effective then yelling TROLL

More inventive and less ad-hominim as well in case this un inventive one is really just being his or her self.
I forget that this could be how the person really is. Most other forums, are more, um flameprone.

Oh UT. Always a laugh with you.
I hope so humor is something good to have

Oh UT. Always a laugh with you.
I need 30cc's of Lunatic Goofballs, stat.

I need 30cc's of Lunatic Goofballs, stat.
Send him a TG.

Your one to talk.
I like what I see in the mirror, and I sleep well every night. :p

I like what I see in the mirror, and I sleep well every night. :p
So do I. Although it's a bit hard at the moment with the heat.

But they are still a minority.

Yes. I don't believe the US is rendering anything. It's like dismanteling all nukes. But keep a few. Just in case. They almost admit it in the article.
Not exactly something in which to get yer panties in a wad about, eh? :p

I need 30cc's of Lunatic Goofballs, stat.
The sad thing is I am like him in real life … just more subdued on here for some reason.

Not exactly something in which to get yer panties in a wad about, eh? :p
Anything US controlled is bad. So it is worthy of beeing upset about.

So do I. Although it's a bit hard at the moment with the heat.
Poor babie. Protest global warming. :)

It is a shame that nobody got the copyright on the internet...sort of how it is a shame that the U.S.A did not claim the moon as our sovereign terroritory when we got their first and planted our flag.

Anything US controlled is bad. So it is worthy of beeing upset about.
How very ... cynical of you.

Anything US controlled is bad. So it is worthy of beeing upset about.

I see someone has a case of the thursdays. :(

Anything US controlled is bad. So it is worthy of beeing upset about.
Did you read my post about if they give up root level DNS?

It would NOT be possible for them to maintain a partial control. Not unless the US decides to make their own separate network

How very ... cynical of you.
Realistic is more like it.

I see someone has a case of the thursdays. :(
I diagnose hemmerroids.

I see someone has a case of the thursdays. :(
It's friday.

Realistic is more like it.
Glad we live in separate ones then.

It is a shame that nobody got the copyright on the internet...sort of how it is a shame that the U.S.A did not claim the moon as our sovereign terroritory when we got their first and planted our flag.
Um I think you would need to patent the internet not copyright it

And the patent would be due by now if I remember patent law correctly

I diagnose hemmerroids.
Weren't you the one with those?

Glad we live in separate ones then.
Yeah. In your mind the US is a shining beacon of justice. Must be something you caught during your time in the services.

Um I think you would need to patent the internet not copyright it

And the patent would be due by now if I remember patent law correctly

oh right, thats what I meant. Yeah I know! I just wish that sombody had the brains to patent it! It would have made them a fortune and created a good number of jobs for Americans. Like most great inventions of the past 200 years , the internet was created in America.

Like most great inventions of the past 200 years , the internet was created in America.
Riiiiiihgt.

TROLL!

http://z.about.com/d/collectdolls/1/0/l/G/troll.jpg

Um I think you would need to patent the internet not copyright it

And the patent would be due by now if I remember patent law correctly
And the fact that nobody did patent the internet is the only reason it is of any use.

oh right, thats what I meant. Yeah I know! I just wish that sombody had the brains to patent it! It would have made them a fortune and created a good number of jobs for Americans. Like most great inventions of the past 200 years , the internet was created in America.
To an extent

How would it have created more jobs though? I mean we ran infrastructure control the entire time locally with ICANN as well as all the top level.


In fact not stifling the growth of the internet is probably the biggest income maker we could have done.

And the fact that nobody did patent the internet is the only reason it is of any use.
No kidding ... we got to controll it and that created jobs ... and the massive ammount of traffic created more jobs and profit

oh right, thats what I meant. Yeah I know! I just wish that sombody had the brains to patent it! It would have made them a fortune and created a good number of jobs for Americans. Like most great inventions of the past 200 years , the internet was created in America.
So the internet would suck. It would be nowheres near as widespread.

Riiiiiihgt.

the steam ship, the light bulb, the train, the plane, the computer, the internet, the telephone, the space shuttle, come to mind, among others.

Riiiiiihgt.

the steam ship, the light bulb, the train, the plane, the computer, the internet, the telephone, the space shuttle, television come to mind, among others.

And the fact that nobody did patent the internet is the only reason it is of any use.

That does not make sense.

the steam ship, the light bulb, the train, the plane, the computer, the internet, the telephone, the space shuttle, come to mind, among others.
The train was invented by the Romans.

To an extent

How would it have created more jobs though? I mean we ran infrastructure control the entire time locally with ICANN as well as all the top level.


In fact not stifling the growth of the internet is probably the biggest income maker we could have done.

Because we would have made a profit. "Stifling growth" is how one profits off of an invention. Too bad nobody did.

That does not make sense.
The internets growth came on the free access and exchange and the open ness.

Not only that but it would have been impossible to do … you know how many kinds of “Networks” there are out there … there is no possible way they could have had a controlling patent on it

So the internet would suck. It would be nowheres near as widespread.

Let me take this time to remind you that the internet is a series of tubes. It is not a big truck. It is a series of tubes. ( daily show reference anyone?)

The train was invented by the Romans.

Oh yeah, I saw that on the history channel. The one that was pulled by horses...LOL.

Because we would have made a profit. "Stifling growth" is how one profits off of an invention. Too bad nobody did.
You kidding American companies have raked in the profits

This is not a physical object Bary this is a logical ideal the patent would not have lasted beyond the 80’s when network design differed enough to not have them covered.

Not to mention when we got off the arpnet backbone

the steam ship, the light bulb, the train, the plane, the computer, the internet, the telephone, the space shuttle, television come to mind, among others.
Train: British
Steam ship: British (well, Scottish realy)
Plane: Multiple
Phone: British
TV: German
Computer: German
Among others.

The internets growth came on the free access and exchange and the open ness.

Not only that but it would have been impossible to do … you know how many kinds of “Networks” there are out there … there is no possible way they could have had a controlling patent on it

Which is why America has now ceded control. Which really is a mistake, we would be well served to hang on to it.

Train: British
Steam ship: British (well, Scottish realy)
Plane: Multiple
Phone: British
TV: German
Computer: German
Among others.
Phone: Canadian

Train: British
Steam ship: British (well, Scottish realy)
Plane: Multiple
Phone: British
TV: German
Computer: German
Among others.
Computer german? I believe English were the ones that beat everyone to the electronic computer

Though if you really want to get old school Babbage could be counted as the first designer

Which is why America has now ceded control. Which really is a mistake, we would be well served to hang on to it.
Yes, increasing the rate of progress is highly over-rated.

Which is why America has now ceded control. Which really is a mistake, we would be well served to hang on to it.
How?

You kidding American companies have raked in the profits

This is not a physical object Bary this is a logical ideal the patent would not have lasted beyond the 80’s when network design differed enough to not have them covered.

Not to mention when we got off the arpnet backbone

It is a shame that no one person can control it. That is what my point is. It would have made a real fortune. Too bad one nation can't.....either.

It is a shame that no one person can control it. That is what my point is. It would have made a real fortune. Too bad one nation can't.....either.
The technology it spurred is greater than the fortune it could have brought. Stop thinking with your wallet.

It is a shame that no one person can control it. That is what my point is. It would have made a real fortune. Too bad one nation can't.....either.
By its very nature it can not be owned by one entity ... if it was there would NOT have been the nessisary invention to progress it into the future

The technology it spurred is greater than the fortune it could have brought. Stop thinking with your wallet.
Most of the "internet" was created by open source pioneers this would NOT have been possible with a privatly owned internet

Train: British
Steam ship: British (well, Scottish realy)
Plane: Multiple
Phone: British
TV: German
Computer: German
Among others.

wow are you ever wrong. The scots got the steam engine but.."The era of the steamboat began in America in 1787 when John Fitch (1743-1798) made the first successful trial of a forty-five-foot steamboat on the Delaware River on August 22, 1787, in the presence of members of the Constitutional Convention." http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blsteamship.htm

the plane? Multiple...you ass! I have no response other than "Kitty Hawk" look it up. I guess it was "multiple" when you include the ones that did not work.

phone: "The patent for the telephone was granted to Alexander Graham Bell on March 7th 1876, at that time he resided in Salem, Massachusetts. "
http://www.faqfarm.com/Q/Where_and_how_was_the_telephone_invented

tv: 1927: Bell Telephone and the U.S. Department of Commerce conduct the first long distance use of TV, between Washington D.C. and New York City on April 9th. Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover commented, “Today we have, in a sense, the transmission of sight for the first time in the world’s history. Human genius has now destroyed the impediment of distance in a new respect, and in a manner hitherto unknown.” Philo Farnsworth files for a patent on the first complete electronic television system, which he called the Image Dissector.

1928: The Federal Radio Commission issues the first television license (W3XK) to Charles Jenkins.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl_television_timeline.htm

computer: sorry, I meant PC, not the old british/ German ones that took of entire Gyms...yeah IBM 1981. Pc...

Do not mess with the History buff.

Phone: Canadian

Massachusetts is in Canada? Close but no cigar.

How?

The internet was an American invention and we should develope technolgy to allow us to keep control over it.

The technology it spurred is greater than the fortune it could have brought. Stop thinking with your wallet.

What other way is there to think?

The internet was an American invention and we should develope technolgy to allow us to keep control over it.
Why?

The internet was an American invention and we should develope technolgy to allow us to keep control over it.
How though? as a Computer Networking and computer information security major I see absolutly no way to controll the INTERNET

Parts of it maybe for a time

So tell me how ... what device or technology could be patented to controll the internet?

Why?
Because we thought of it and the typical grubby world community idea of ooo this is good, it is mine somehow just does not fly with me.

Why?
Not just why ... but how

Seriously what could the US do to controll the internet ... you know quite a bit about it can you honestly think of any technology that would be crucial?

Massachusetts is in Canada? Close but no cigar.
Alexander Graham Bell was Canadian.

Because we thought of it and the typical grubby world community idea of ooo this is good, it is mine somehow just does not fly with me.
We thought of arpnet ... the government really had no controll over what happened after that

They could have possibly slowed down overseas communication but in the end the links are privatly controlled

How though? as a Computer Networking and computer information security major I see absolutly no way to controll the INTERNET

Parts of it maybe for a time

So tell me how ... what device or technology could be patented to controll the internet?

I have no idea. No technical expertise....I am just describing what I wish were so.....but y'all jumped on me like I was saying thats the way it is. If you know what you are talking about and say it is not possible then fine. I still do not see why http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3725

that cannot be the headline now?

Not just why ... but how

Seriously what could the US do to controll the internet ... you know quite a bit about it can you honestly think of any technology that would be crucial?
I can throw together an idea of how it could be done. It does require an unfathomably fast super-computer with an equally unrealistic internet connection.

I have no idea. No technical expertise....I am just describing what I wish were so.....but y'all jumped on me like I was saying thats the way it is. If you know what you are talking about and say it is not possible then fine. I still do not see why http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3725

that cannot be the headline now?
You want an incorrect article headline? Those idiots can’t tell the Internet from the World Wide Web

Apparently you are getting confused too

We possibly could maintain control over the WWW for a bit more but not the Internet we have not had control over that for like 20 years

Despite the sentiments, however, it was apparent from the carefully selected panel and audience members that the internet - despite its global reach - remains an English-speaking possession. Not one of the 11 panel members, nor any of the 22 people that spoke during the meeting, had anything but English as their first language.

Typical.

That's pretty naive of you if you thought it should be otherwise. Small steps are the only way to get things like this done. Go too big at once and things'll come crashing down on you faster than you can say "WTF"

Alexander Graham Bell was Canadian.



born in Scotland, invented the telephone after coming to America. Invented it in Salem, Massachusetts. He died in Canada........40 years...later......se you all later....

I can throw together an idea of how it could be done. It does require an unfathomably fast super-computer with an equally unrealistic internet connection.
Active blocking? I mean you would have to have a choke point but even so you could at most break up parts of the internet not controll it

We possibly could maintain control over the WWW for a bit more but not the Internet we have not had control over that for like 20 years

Now, I really don't know the difference, so would you mind explaining it to me? :confused:

Now, I really don't know the difference, so would you mind explaining it to me? :confused:

The "Internet" is the phisical connection which is a bunch of interconnected networks.

The WWW is the logical setup and data that travles over the internet. (web pages essentialy) (but the internet carries more then web traffic)

wow are you ever wrong. The scots got the steam engine but.."The era of the steamboat began in America in 1787 when John Fitch (1743-1798) made the first successful trial of a forty-five-foot steamboat on the Delaware River on August 22, 1787, in the presence of members of the Constitutional Convention." http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blsteamship.htm
No steamengine no boat.

the plane? Multiple...you ass! I have no response other than "Kitty Hawk" look it up. I guess it was "multiple" when you include the ones that did not work.
Yeah. Multiple. The Kitty Hawk was just the first operational one.

phone: "The patent for the telephone was granted to Alexander Graham Bell on March 7th 1876, at that time he resided in Salem, Massachusetts. "
http://www.faqfarm.com/Q/Where_and_how_was_the_telephone_invented
And still he was just a British immigrant.

tv: 1927: Bell Telephone and the U.S. Department of Commerce conduct the first long distance use of TV, between Washington D.C. and New York City on April 9th. Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover commented, “Today we have, in a sense, the transmission of sight for the first time in the world’s history. Human genius has now destroyed the impediment of distance in a new respect, and in a manner hitherto unknown.” Philo Farnsworth files for a patent on the first complete electronic television system, which he called the Image Dissector.

1928: The Federal Radio Commission issues the first television license (W3XK) to Charles Jenkins.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl_television_timeline.htm
.
Paul Gottlieb Nipkow.


Do not mess with the History buff.
Thats supposed to be you? :D And the Ostrogoths came from Asia right?

Because we thought of it and the typical grubby world community idea of ooo this is good, it is mine somehow just does not fly with me.
We would aslo be equally intitled to reverse-engineer it. The original developers hated patent laws, most would have surely switched to a free(dom) international project had the institutions sponsoring it seeked a patent. Sadly, things started to go downhill once the buisnessmen saw there was profit to be made.

Active blocking? I mean you would have to have a choke point but even so you could at most break up parts of the internet not controll it
Have all the computers hooked up to one single metaputer. You want to host a website, you ask metaputer to do it for you. You want to IM Bill from work, you ask metaputer to send him the IM in your name.

Have all the computers hooked up to one single metaputer. You want to host a website, you ask metaputer to do it for you. You want to IM Bill from work, you ask metaputer to send him the IM in your name.
Oh so have a single point of serving and disallow distributed serving … wow that would piss off every person on the planet lol

Oh so have a single point of serving and disallow distributed serving … wow that would piss off every person on the planet lol
They are just trying to earn a living.

They are just trying to earn a living.
You are right lol … your idea is not feasible lol .Well its not too bad if they had to have single compliancy checks with distributed serving but there is no way to set that up right now. Though maybe with IPSEC

You are right lol … your idea is not feasible lol .Well its not too bad if they had to have single compliancy checks with distributed serving but there is no way to set that up right now. Though maybe with IPSEC
Well, they would just have to make sure that every computer was hooked up directly to metaputer (maybe with ISP getting expensive liscences to allow them to moniter your usage etc). But it does leave itself to an alternete internet starting up.

Though they could just sue the pants off them.

The "Internet" is the phisical connection which is a bunch of interconnected networks.

The WWW is the logical setup and data that travles over the internet. (web pages essentialy) (but the internet carries more then web traffic)

So the Internet is the physical connections of computers, etc, while the WWW is the main portion of the data travelling.

What other data travels on the internet?

Since I think it is possible to fake its on topicness. What do you think of AMD buying ATI. I generally am quite happy about it. AMD is quite Linux friendly, and many think that AMD would have to Open Source the fglrx driver, like Intel did for their IG driver. This would mean happy days for Linux users crazy enough to use ATI, and we could see Linux shift to focus in optimizing graphics for ATI cards, instead of NVIDIA. Else, NVIDIA would open their driver to keep ATI from taking a complete strangle hold of the Linux market.

So the Internet is the physical connections of computers, etc, while the WWW is the main portion of the data travelling.

What other data travels on the internet?
FTP Torrents Usenet SMTP

Since I think it is possible to fake its on topicness. What do you think of AMD buying ATI. I generally am quite happy about it. AMD is quite Linux friendly, and many think that AMD would have to Open Source the fglrx driver, like Intel did for their IG driver. This would mean happy days for Linux users crazy enough to use ATI, and we could see Linux shift to focus in optimizing graphics for ATI cards, instead of NVIDIA. Else, NVIDIA would open their driver to keep ATI from taking a complete strangle hold of the Linux market.
I agree happy to see the pairing here

Ruh roh.


This does not bode well.

I wonder what the grabastic UN will try and outlaw now....

I agree happy to see the pairing here
I actually haven't check what many Linux sites have had to say about it. I suppose I should check Tuxmachines, Mad Penguin, and the rest.

FTP Torrents Usenet SMTP

Ooh, right, all ze filesharing stuff.

Ooh, right, all ze filesharing stuff.
In fact if I remember my flow charts right WWW traffic is not the majority of the internet over the internet

In fact if I remember my flow charts right WWW traffic is not the majority of the internet over the internet

You have a sad life if you charted all of that. :D

What is the majority?

You have a sad life if you charted all of that. :D

What is the majority?
I am a networking graduate we have to do that sort of stuff its not really hard with the right tools (Hell a good packet sniffer and TCPSTAT will get you a lot of information)

IF I remember right it was torrent traffic

Alexander Graham Bell was Canadian.

Sorry, but Bell was Scottish by birth.

Al Bell (http://www.fi.edu/franklin/inventor/bell.html)

So at most, the Scots and Americans can claim him by birth and residency.

I am a networking graduate we have to do that sort of stuff its not really hard with the right tools (Hell a good packet sniffer and TCPSTAT will get you a lot of information)

IF I remember right it was torrent traffic
Isn't Torrents in the 40% range now?

I am a networking graduate we have to do that sort of stuff its not really hard with the right tools (Hell a good packet sniffer and TCPSTAT will get you a lot of information)

Then you're excused. :D

IF I remember right it was torrent traffic

What exactly is torrent? No, I don't get out of my bubble much.

Sorry, but Bell was Scottish by birth.

Al Bell (http://www.fi.edu/franklin/inventor/bell.html)

So at most, the Scots and Americans can claim him by birth and residency.
And he was voted one of the top ten greatest Canadians.

He did live in Canada for a period of time.

Wiki backs me on this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Graham_Bell#Biography)

A torrent is a meta-data file that directs peers to where the file is located, or something. Then, you download the files by first seeding it (making multiple copies) and trading pieces (maybe 512KB each) until you have all the pieces and the full file/folders/whatever.

A torrent is a meta-data file that directs peers to where the file is located, or something. Then, you download the files by first seeding it (making multiple copies) and trading pieces (maybe 512KB each) until you have all the pieces and the full file/folders/whatever.

So it's one massive online puzzle.

Well, there are lots of torrent files, you know. You download the torrent, load it into your BitTorrent client, and then let the sharing begin.

also, it has the best files and in huge "swarms" downloading goes exceptionally fast. but, yeah, that's what I understand it to be.

A torrent is a file you download. Then using a torrent program, you use the torrent file. The file will tell the program where to find the tracker, and what files you need. You then tell the tracker you want to start sharing. The tracker will then have a few of the computers start sending you data. Once you have a smidgent of data, the tracker will start telling your computer to send the data to other computers. Once you have all the data, you become a seeder, and provide the data to everyone else. People love seeders.

And he was voted one of the top ten greatest Canadians.

He did live in Canada for a period of time.

Wiki backs me on this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Graham_Bell#Biography)

Yeah, he lived there for a quite a few years, that hardly makes him a Canadian. Besides, he was a naturalized citizen of the US, and I don't think, until recently, the US would allow for dual citizenship.

People love seeders.

That just sounds vaguely pornographic somehow.:D

A torrent is a file you download. Then using a torrent program, you use the torrent file. The file will tell the program where to find the tracker, and what files you need. You then tell the tracker you want to start sharing. The tracker will then have a few of the computers start sending you data. Once you have a smidgent of data, the tracker will start telling your computer to send the data to other computers. Once you have all the data, you become a seeder, and provide the data to everyone else. People love seeders.

I like seeders, but I don't seed. I have bad etiquette.:D

I like seeders, but I don't seed. I have bad etiquette.:D
Which remindes me. I have to start bitcomet, so I can not seed.:D

wow are you ever wrong. The scots got the steam engine but..

Nah: the English had operational industrial steam engines up and runnign before the Scots got on the scene - I refer you to Savery and Newcomen's atmospheric engine.

the plane? Multiple...you ass! I have no response other than "Kitty Hawk" look it up. I guess it was "multiple" when you include the ones that did not work.

You have failed to sufficiently define what you mean by 'plane' here: powered? heavier than air? tethered or freeflying?

tv: 1927: Bell Telephone and the U.S. Department of Commerce conduct the first long distance use of TV, between Washington D.C. and New York City on April 9th. Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover commented, “Today we have, in a sense, the transmission of sight for the first time in the world’s history. Human genius has now destroyed the impediment of distance in a new respect, and in a manner hitherto unknown.” Philo Farnsworth files for a patent on the first complete electronic television system, which he called the Image Dissector.

1928: The Federal Radio Commission issues the first television license (W3XK) to Charles Jenkins.

Meh, not only had Baird demonstrated the TV in 1926, but Hoover seems to be woefully ignorant of the use of the fax machine (invented 1863 by a Scot) if he thinks TV was the first transmision of sight.

since when did america own the internet?? no-one can own something like that.

since when did america own the internet?? no-one can own something like that.
No but the idiots that write thoes things do not know the difference beteen the WWW and the internet

ICANN as of now does have a stranglehold on the web though

Wait...essentially all the US did was give up its "Seat" on the board of directors, right? That hardly makes it an international body, even less a UN body (As some wanted). ICAAN is still a private (US Based) company, I think the move was only symbolic.

Wait...essentially all the US did was give up its "Seat" on the board of directors, right? That hardly makes it an international body, even less a UN body (As some wanted). ICAAN is still a private (US Based) company, I think the move was only symbolic.
To start with yes ... hopefully we can move ICANN and make it a bit more fair to the rest of the world

Is this a good thing? And does it affect the 'Net Neutrality debate?

precisely!

NO governemnt has any bussiness "controlling" the internet. period. whatsoever at all. period.

what governments can, moraly and legitimately, do. is require service providers to keep their corporate noses out, of any and all content, they do not themselves provide, and protect end users, from having their content distorted, misrepresented or discriminated against.

the only ligitimate authoritys over international communications are the united nations, world court, and international law.

=^^=
.../\...

precisely!

NO governemnt has any bussiness "controlling" the internet. period. whatsoever at all. period.

what governments can, moraly and legitimately, do. is require service providers to keep their corporate noses out, of any and all content, they do not themselves provide, and protect end users, from having their content distorted, misrepresented or discriminated against.

the only ligitimate authoritys over international communications are the united nations, world court, and international law.

=^^=
.../\...


Come again? That does not make sense.

The Web could work on a range of underlying infrastructure. It's just HTTP that ties it to TCP/IP.

I wouldn't even say it does that. Ever heard of Freenet?

wow, something else america thought it had the rights to.

So the Internet is the physical connections of computers, etc, while the WWW is the main portion of the data travelling.

What other data travels on the internet?

Many, many, many other protocols.

FTP, SNMP, tunneled TCP/IP connections, SMTP, NNTP, just to name a few...

Don't forget the various alternate networks that partly or mainly use the Internet as a tunnel, such as Fidonet or Freenet.

Have a look on Google for "common port numbers" or "common Internet protocols", and while you're at it, have a look for a zipped copy of all known RFCs. Best way to describe it, is the Internet defines the roads, whereas the protocols define the vehicle types.

I wouldn't even say it does that. Ever heard of Freenet?
Not to mention most of the backbone moves away from TCP/IP for most big connections and more into sonnet

To start with yes ... hopefully we can move ICANN and make it a bit more fair to the rest of the world

Moving the base of a company means nothing if all of the leaders are from the same country. It would be like the King of France moving from Versailles to Chateau-sur-Mont. He rules from a different spot, but he's still the King of France.

To be honest, though, I would much rather have the WWW in the hands of a private multinational company than the UN or such. To think if Syria or Iran or China got a large say, there'd inevitably be censorship. Frankly, I don't trust an organization that puts nations like Lybia, Syria, and Sudan on the Human Rights Commission.

Moving the base of a company means nothing if all of the leaders are from the same country. It would be like the King of France moving from Versailles to Chateau-sur-Mont. He rules from a different spot, but he's still the King of France.

To be honest, though, I would much rather have the WWW in the hands of a private multinational company than the UN or such. To think if Syria or Iran or China got a large say, there'd inevitably be censorship. Frankly, I don't trust an organization that puts nations like Lybia, Syria, and Sudan on the Human Rights Commission.
And I don’t trust a country that actively worked to force ICANN to disallow a top level domain because it for some stupid reason, because their pet religious groups got their panties all in a twist over it.

The us has already shown they can not be trusted in keeping the internet minimally censorship free

um... america never really owned the internet.

And I don’t trust a country that actively worked to force ICANN to disallow a top level domain because it for some stupid reason, because their pet religious groups got their panties all in a twist over it.

Now, to be entirely honest, I have no idea what you just said, but I'm gonna WAG it and say you were talking about the pornography domain?

And I agree, that decision was dumb. This coming from a fundemental Calvinist.

The us has already shown they can not be trusted in keeping the internet minimally censorship free

Not true at all. The restriction of a domain doesn't relate to censorship -- the websites are still there, are they not? Out of decency, they should be restricted by age.


However, if that's not what you're talking about, my apologies. :D

Computer german? I believe English were the ones that beat everyone to the electronic computer.
No. They didn't. Eventhough the man's accomplishments were kept largely quit.
His name was Konrad Zuse. His Z3 predates the Harvard Mark I by 3 years.