No Government should CONTROL

[Clarity]

A Growing Dilemma - The "real" internet

"The Internet MUST be moved to the UN and taken away from current owners before TOO LATE!"

[backi]

@Clarity wrote:

"The Internet MUST be moved to the UN and taken away from current owners before TOO LATE!"

Much Luck!.....
Sure.....your Intentions are good....but wishful Thinking.
But how shall it work?........
Stuck in a vicious Circle.

before TOO LATE!

Maybe i sound somewhat a tad to paranoid...or pessimistic.....or desperate.....Probably it is already "TOO LATE".
Probably "We" did never had/have any Chance.

So the Problem appears to be....
I assume......the same different rivaling"Cabals"/"Gangs"...... who are in Control of the Internet (or are trying to be in Control of the Internet or "Money",Military , "Banking", "Big Pharma et cetera )....are probably already controlling the UN..... or are trying to control the UN too.....same goes for "Governments".
(On the search for a New World Order (NWO).

I just could be wrong......
Probably it is just a Question of.... which "Gang"/Powergroup will be the more or longer dominating Group in the Power"Scene"......

Seems there is no Way "out" of this vicious Circle............except War.

[mikewalsh]

By your definition then, Backi, the only sure-fire cure for the problems of the human race's own making is quite obvious.....

The total annihalation of said human race! (We should just commit mass-suicide, right? Nice & simplistic.)

I never DID see a guy like you for looking on the bleak side all the time.

Let's drop the subject RIGHT THERE, shall we? You're already dragging this thread "off-topic".....as usual.

Mike.

[8Geee]

The UN ehhh?

Biggest bureaucracy and non-action on the planet. Even a divided bicameral gov't gets more done.
Sheeesh, just pull the plug and D/C, its safer.

Oh wait, thats not gonna happen either!

[Clarity]

The Technology known as the internet is "not"off-topic.

Protecting, thinking of approaches, guiding, or suggestions of PC technologies that are not specifically Puppy or DOGs is what Off-Topic should be about,IMHO. (Of course others will disagree on anyone's pathway, as that is the normal human behavior that affects us all.)

The ideas we are looking at in this thread are NOT inviting political nor religious discourse, but, needs our thoughts of solutions or pathways that could provide overall benefit to the mass use of technology. Whether that is through information to bring awareness or through information that could twart misuse of technology which is covered in this Security sub-topic.

I am hopeful that we see such pathways to the technological problems, we, PUPPY's mankind faces as time progresses. And when having the opportunity take any steps to could/would lead to solutions whenever we are in a position to do such.

Since the beginning of time, mankind has had interest, not just in the making of tools thru a technological mindset, but also in the improvements of those tools for beneficial use.

Let's continue to be thougthful and creative.

[8Geee]

I differ.... Puppy is lets say 0.1% if the OS market. This affects all 100%. Clearly 999:1 off-topic.

having written that, control of the internet DOES need to be independent of major giga/tera dollar entities AND the gov't.
The article points out a vote for the UN. Control by the UN is both gov't and non-independent... just as graftable and corruptable as any other gov't. But what is more disconcerting IMHO is the move by the giga/tera dollar corporations INTO the ISP decision-making. I would humbly suggest looking at the pedigree of upper management. Just how many came from one (or more!) of the 10 biggest Tech/Internet Companies. Theres quite a few in LinuxLand, too. Remember github?, sold to M$. The move by big $, and big power is unstoppable, just as long as the gov't gets a piece of the action.

You and I, and the rest of Puppyville are merely in the way.

Regards
8Geee

[Clarity]

Here's another example on why we, users, must begin to demand the Internet be moved under the control of the UN where international rules for ALL nation states will apply.

Mankind lives of 4 basic needs: Shelter, water, food, and communications.

The internet has become an integral part of modern existence for communications. When we allow any specific nation to control the up/down of communications use, it affords particular damaging and crippling of our ability to communicate. Here's a report that gives some ideas.

On a similar course of maintaining consistent Internet rules, our best minds across the world are signaling a need to prep for a potential tsunami that can disrupt and/or shutdown internet use. This, again, poses an international problem where a consistent solution can benefit mankind. Reports on this are everywhere.

Individual nation state controls should NOT be allowed. International consistent rules for all member nations should be the standard.

This ability to share knowledge and information should be a "right" of access for all of mankind, no manner our location on the planet.

We dont control the internet, I know. Yet we, each, has a voice to demand of our leaders. If you think it reasonable, ask for universal internet under the UN or some international body that all countries participate and will abhere to not incur penalties.

This technology should and must be made universal for all of our benefit.

FYI

[jamesbond]

Interesting thoughts, but ... what makes you think that the UN would be better than those nation states?

The UN leaders comes from the very nation states that makes you concerned.
The UN leaders are comprised of the same fallible and corruptible homo sapiens as those who lead the nation states.
So what makes you think that they will make a better decision that those nation-states?

(This is not even considering the fact the UN is not always able to form enough consensus to make a decision. Some decisions are never made because they kept being stalled (and/or veto-ed) by some nation states. And when they do make a decision - there is no consequences if the nation states who disagree with them, don't follow it. In other words, toothless.)

[Clarity]

So what makes you think that they will make a better decision that those nation-states?

We've got 20 years of experience if the world does nothing.

Current directions indicate its fractured and is getting worst without consensus.

If there are other ideas for solutions, I wonder if we should present them.

Let's think, a little, about potential solutions that would be consistent across the worldwide spectrum to enforce good internet behavior and accountability.

[wiak]

having written that, control of the internet DOES need to be independent of major giga/tera dollar entities AND the gov't.
The article points out a vote for the UN. Control by the UN is both gov't and non-independent... just as graftable and corruptable as any other gov't. But what is more disconcerting IMHO is the move by the giga/tera dollar corporations INTO the ISP decision-making. I would humbly suggest looking at the pedigree of upper management. Just how many came from one (or more!) of the 10 biggest Tech/Internet Companies. Theres quite a few in LinuxLand, too. Remember github?, sold to M$. The move by big $, and big power is unstoppable, just as long as the gov't gets a piece of the action.

The Internet is not however air nor water. It is a technology whose very existence is the result of near-total sponsorship by government military organisations, and most so by USA military research (these organisations, including space agencies, incidentally provided the majority of PhD-level research sponsorship to university research groups around the world that invented/designs most all TCP/IP and so on protocols involved). You cannot divorce government military budget matters from government commercial-tax-gathering-activites (meaning, on the whole, taxes of business and so on provide the overall government budgets from which an often sizable slice gets allocated to continuing military spending/research).

Yes, the Internet has become part of the daily fabric of our society (social and commercial) albeit only for the past 30 years. It didn't exist at all before that, so it truly is very recent. Like it or not, we in the West at least (and not only we in the West) live in a society organised on the basis of capitalism - that includes the funding of our military(s), which continue to be one of the main sponsors of all technological research (and even health/human-body/psychology-related research - for defence and warfare). Certainly there are a few enormously rich individuals/companies pushing the boundaries further (the Elon Musks and so on of this 'brave new world' of electric cars and space exploration) but again that is commercialism/capitalism as the driving force - not some elusive democratic government by the people for the people utopia that exists nowhere but in the imagination of desire and dreams.

[Grey]

but again that is commercialism/capitalism as the driving force - not some elusive democratic government by the people for the people utopia that exists nowhere but in the imagination of desire and dreams.

Sad but true. An attempt to copy such a system in the East with the addition of local flavor leads to unpredictable consequences. It may turn out even worse, or maybe better (well, for a part of the population, for sure ). Although it seems that the copy should be worse than the original

[Clarity]

Yet another reason to take the Internet to an International Body to force all countries to have a consistent behavior. Enjoy

There are no rules ... at all. This, in the long run, will unravel into an uncontrolled mess. In its present form, it potentially will escalate into country against country. where the internet will be used as a weapon. Much more so, than we have seen with individual uses.

[Clarity]

Yet another example for international management. If rules were monitored-enforced out of a consistent body with all countries participating, this would not be necessary at this level of service offerings.

It is hopeful in my lifetime that I see this becoming "Internationally Central" for all humans benefit. Thus any beneficial efforts for one is a benefit for all.

P.S. The "theme" of the article goes beyond the company. It, rather, reinforces this thread's theme. One country should NOT be allowed to mandate its own rules controlling the internet.

[Clarity]

Creditable info. Internet users could be upset and seek a better way forward.

[Grey]

One country should NOT be allowed to mandate its own rules controlling the internet.

One country (yes, the US) considers itself a "world policeman". The central offices and headquarters of the largest IT companies are located in the United States. Almost all services in other countries are copied from the American ones. One country should not impose, but MAY dictate its own rules.

It is hopeful in my lifetime that I see this becoming "Internationally Central" for all humans benefit.

In my country, young people no longer believe in international impulses. There are still a few old people who still remember the motive and lyrics of songs like The Internationale (the international anthem of the proletariat, socialists and anarchists), but soon they will not be left either.