UN wants greater(read: at all) control over the Internet

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2004-03-28 12:29am

Just Fuckin' Great...

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-03-28 12:32am

*wipes tears from eyes*

"Governing" the Internet. That's classic.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-03-28 01:04am

Okay, yet another brain fart from the UN. Maybe it happens when they eat baked beans?

.

Why anyone takes the UN seriously anymore, I'll never know

.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-03-28 01:07am

The UN powerless against dictator and genocidal warlords,but tough against everything else.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-28 01:09am

Montcalm wrote:The UN powerless against dictator and genocidal warlords,but tough against everything else.

Although it exists for the express purpose of stopping said dictators and genocidal warlords...

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-03-28 01:11am

Rogue 9 wrote:
Montcalm wrote:The UN powerless against dictator and genocidal warlords,but tough against everything else.
Although it exists for the express purpose of stopping said dictators and genocidal warlords...

Yeah they did a wonderful job in Rwanda

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-28 01:19am

I know. The point is that the UN is failing in its task. Its very quickly going the way of the League of Nations.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-03-28 01:37am

I know. The point is that the UN is failing in its task. Its very quickly going the way of the League of Nations.

Despite it's many failures and shortcomings the UN is hardly going way of League of Nations.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-28 01:49am

Well, it likely won't go away soon; too much bureaucratic inertia. But I mean its becoming very ineffectual at its task, just like the League of Nations did before dissolving at the outbreak of the Second World War.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-03-28 01:52am

They may as well try staking a claim to control the wind while they're at it.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-28 01:52am

The UN is a piece of shit. Its organization is a joke, since any of the permanent members of the SC can veto ANY piece of legislation as often as they want. This makes the General Assembly into a joke. Meanwhile, the UN is handing over control of the committees to countries that they LEAST want to have the power in those areas, and the organization is TOTALLY powerless to enforce its resolutions.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-03-28 02:00am

Rogue 9 wrote:Well, it likely won't go away soon; too much bureaucratic inertia. But I mean its becoming very ineffectual at its task, just like the League of Nations did before dissolving at the outbreak of the Second World War.

Officially, the League was not dissolved until 1945 when the UN was formed, but of course it was irrelivant long before then. The League was doomed from the very beginning, because the United States refused to join it. This is ironic, because the League was the brainchild of Woodrow Wilson.

The UN today is for all intents and purposes irrelevant, but I expect it to linger for a very long time. The League would have also lingered for a long time, were it not for World War II.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-03-28 02:03am

I wouldn't call it irrelevant. It may be powerless, but the UN is *not* completely irrelevant, as the war with Iraq showed. It's still a tool to be used for diplomacy.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-03-28 06:36am

Think what you will of the UN in the context of what is being said here about dictators and such, but that's all nothing but a big pile of red herring bullshit where the topic of the thread is concerned.

ICANN is a hopelessly bureaucratic and corrupt organization with no representation and no transparency and it is more or less either in the pocket of individual computer industry players or powerless before them. Their decision-making process about several things that are vital to the further development of the Internet has been marred by bribery, arbitrary reversals, caving in to lobbyist demands and plain outright refusal to listen to anybody but who they damn well please.

Consequently, the ICANN as it now stands simply has to go, and it wouldn't be a bad idea to have an international standards organization along the lines of the ITU-T or something equivalent making the decisions about domain names and registration, and furthermore have those decisions be binding so we wouldn't have the kind of shit that parties like Verizon, the ICANN itself and others have pulled at various points.

But I do happen to agree that this new body must not under any circumstances be under UN control, or otherwise we'll have various fuckwits like countries with influential Islamic fundamentalists, China and others forcing watered-down decisions or ramming all kinds of censorship shit down everyone's throat, which would turn the whole body into a joke (much like ICANN is now). On the other hand, I don't like the idea of all of this being under sole US government control either.

My preferred solution would be to have something jointly governed by the US and the EU, with transparent decision making process and avenues of appeal for decisions. Of course, that happens to be just a pipe dream, political realities being what they are.

Edi

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2004-03-28 09:33am

Ever heard of the ISO ?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-03-28 03:33pm

Thinkmarble wrote:Ever heard of the ISO ?

ISO? ain't that the CD image you get when copying a data disc?

i don't see how these asshats intend to accomplish anything other than a major public outcry because of this. their only way of doing this whatsoever is to put up nation-wide blocks against countries that don't comply with their laws if they went through with this. there will always be someone that finds ways around this type of stuff even if they did manage to get it up and running under their control.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-03-28 03:50pm

Darth_Zod wrote:
Thinkmarble wrote:Ever heard of the ISO ?
ISO? ain't that the CD image you get when copying a data disc?

No, it's called an ISO because the image conforms to the ISO 9660 standard.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-03-28 03:54pm

Darth_Zod wrote:
Thinkmarble wrote:Ever heard of the ISO ?
ISO? ain't that the CD image you get when copying a data disc?

ISO: International Standards Organization. For example, it classifies and regulates all metals and alloys sold over the world.

I agree with Edi. It makes zero sense to adjudicate this to the UN. However, the present situation is unconceivable. The US cannot have the power to mess with internet regulations without having to consider different opinions than its own.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2004-03-29 08:22pm

Politicians seek more power! Film at 11!

From what I hear about the UN's inability to do anything (two members can veto in the security council, or something like that), I'd say this might actually be a good thing. If we could just get governments to leave the internet alone, I would be very happy.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-03-30 01:52am

From what I hear about the UN's inability to do anything (two members can veto in the security council, or something like that),

Actualy any one of the five permanent members can veto any resolution.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-30 02:16am

sketerpot wrote: From what I hear about the UN's inability to do anything (two members can veto in the security council, or something like that), I'd say this might actually be a good thing. If we could just get governments to leave the internet alone, I would be very happy.

It's even more pathetic than you imply: any ONE of the 5 permanent members can unilaterally veto ANY piece of legislation, REGARDLESS of how large a majority it had in the GA, and regardless of how the other members of the SC view the piece. This results in a TOTAL inability of the UN to do anything, and when it does it MUST pander to the needs of the 5 permanent members rather than being used as a tool to prevent them from acting unilaterally or exercising their power unfairly.

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2004-03-30 05:27pm

The reason the UN is said up the way it is, is because the architects fully understood power structre as well as human nature.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-03-30 06:40pm

Thinkmarble wrote:The reason the UN is said up the way it is, is because the architects fully understood power structre as well as human nature.

Well, that explains why the architects created something that was essentially powerless to accomplish the mission it was tasked with doing. Great input, there.

pellaeons_scion · Post by **pellaeons_scion** » 2004-03-30 08:32pm

wait, let me get this right. A major decision comes before the UN, and if one single member of the SC decides for whatever fucked up reason they dont like it, the whole idea is vetoed?

*brain explodes*

How, or why was that implemented? That to me seems like it would effectively cripple 90% of any actions that are brought to the UN?

To me its a big paper tiger, pretending to be something its not. They are all so very good at slamming economic sanctions and other types of political pressure on a country, but when it comes to really getting down in the dirt and applying of force to recalcitrant nations, they are proving themselves to be weaker and weaker.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2005-10-17 01:44am

pellaeons_scion wrote:wait, let me get this right. A major decision comes before the UN, and if one single member of the SC decides for whatever fucked up reason they dont like it, the whole idea is vetoed?

*brain explodes*

How, or why was that implemented? That to me seems like it would effectively cripple 90% of any actions that are brought to the UN?

To me its a big paper tiger, pretending to be something its not. They are all so very good at slamming economic sanctions and other types of political pressure on a country, but when it comes to really getting down in the dirt and applying of force to recalcitrant nations, they are proving themselves to be weaker and weaker.

The SC structure was implemented to protect the power of the major* WW2 Allies to veto anything the GA wishes to implement.

*Frankly I think a better reflection of the reality of the world today would be the removal of France from their permanent seat and their replacement with Japan or Germany, as Japanese or German economic and potential military power is far in excess of France's.