America turning over control of the internet.

[Masark]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Internet actually created by the US military?

Sort of. The history is a bit complex and lengthy.

Summarizing :

TCP/IP was created and initially used on ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network). ARPA (now DARPA) was part of the Department of Defence and responsible for advanced military R&D.

ARPANET essentially became NSFNET (National Science Foundation Network, operated by the civilian National Science Foundation) in the mid-1980s. The military components of ARPANET were split off into their own network known as MILNET.

NSFNET and ARPANET were initially strictly non-commercial networks for academic and government use.

In 1990, NSF allowed Advanced Network and Services (who operated the hardware infrastructure for NSFNET's T1 backbone) to allow commercial traffic to use the NSFNET backbone under certain conditions via it's CO+RE subsidiary. This is where what we'd recognize as the modern Internet comes into being. This availability of ready-made infrastructure resulted in the rapid merging of other previous networks (University networks like UUCPNET, Merit, and BITNET, private services like FidoNet and X.25-based systems, etc.) into the Internet and the rapid expansion of the Web.

Private interests began building their own backbone links beyond the NSF's (which only connected certain major cities in the USA and a handful of other cities globally), giving wider access to the Internet. NSFNET's backbone and privately-built commercial backbone grew alongside each other for a time, but NSFNET backbone was eventually superseded by the commercial Internet and decommissioned in 1995.

[Firefall]

In a word: Yes.

Ugh. I definitely can't support that. I couldn't care less if the president is a nice person. Trump could very well be a huge bigot but it's not like I have to ever talk to the guy or like he'd have the power as president to send us back to the 50s. But he actually *could* have the power to severely damaged the lives of sex workers and psychologically harm people by telling them they're bad for looking at porn. If there's informed consent no one should be bigoted against, period.

I hate this election so much. Hilary *and* Trump are on the record for wanting the US government to control our Internet access (not the conspiracy nonsense of this thread) and being so negative about sexuality is completely unacceptable from Trump. I feel like I'm in that South Park episode.

[haxartus]

Lol, the DNS system that ICANN controls is not the Internet, it's just a lazy ways for humans not to remember number sequences.

[Masark]

Lol, the DNS system that ICANN controls is not the Internet, it's just a lazy ways for humans not to remember number sequences.

ICANN also controls IANA.

[XangXu]

Ghost from True Capitalist Radio has been saying this for god damn ever now, but people wake up when it's too late?

God fuck this world.

[stabetha]

In a word: Yes.

Wait Trump is against child porn? What a monster.

[Daerio]

Wouldn't an independent international organization with 162 member countries be less likely to be swayed by political interests as it relates to information access? Not sure why this is an issue, we have Republicans like Trump who are signing agreements with anti-pornography groups who want to limit pornography access in the United States.

Cruz is probably fear mongering due to evangelical Christians' concerns about one world government entities heralding the end times or something similar.

Yes, and how are the members of this organization chosen, and who are they beholden to?

This is a great way for our politicians to steal our rights and still claim plausible deniability because, "hey look, somebody else is doing it this time!"

Our society seems fairly easily fooled by plausible deniability. The rations for the masses.

[Ripster42]

Wait Trump is against child porn? What a monster.

The pledge comes from the nonpartisan group Enough is Enough, whose founder Donna Rice Hughes has long worked to convince Americans that pornography is severely harmful to individuals and society at large.

Signed by Trump on July 16, the pledge also says the president would seriously consider appointing a special commission to explore effects of pornography on Americans, aggressively enforce the Children's Internet Protection Act, work with corporations on anti-porn initiatives and advance other public policies to protect children from pornography.

It's not just about child porn. Grow up.

[breadisfunny]

Wouldn't an independent international organization with 162 member countries be less likely to be swayed by political interests as it relates to information access? Not sure why this is an issue, we have Republicans like Trump who are signing agreements with anti-pornography groups who want to limit pornography access in the United States.

Cruz is probably fear mongering due to evangelical Christians' concerns about one world government entities heralding the end times or something similar.

the last thing people like you need is access to porn. sassy draenei do not need porn.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not just about child porn. Grow up.

hopefully it includes death sentences for people who make and produce child porn.

[Ravenblade]

ICANN is largely and mainly responsible for assignment and management of IP and DNS addresses. How they are supposed to literally take control of the internet - only Ted Cruz probably knows. Not too long ago some of Cruz' ilk has declared the internet a threat to their ideology. It is pretty understandable though that one who would like to radically censor the internet content available to its users is pretty pissed off about the prospect of an internet which has indeed content censored but not the kind he would like to see censored.

[Daerio]

ICANN is largely and mainly responsible for assignment and management of IP and DNS addresses. How they are supposed to literally take control of the internet - only Ted Cruz probably knows. Not too long ago some of Cruz' ilk has declared the internet a threat to their ideology. It is pretty understandable though that one who would like to radically censor the internet content available to its users is pretty pissed off about the prospect of an internet which has indeed content censored but not the kind he would like to see censored.

The only form of control that truly exists is being able to destroy a thing at whim.

An organization that controls your ability to visit a website does in fact control the internet.

[Ravenblade]

The only form of control that truly exists is being able to destroy a thing at whim.

An organization that controls your ability to visit a website does in fact control the internet.

Well, ICANN is located in the US. It's been criticized for working too closely with the DoC in the past and indeed, it is strongly regulated by the NTIA and can't simply "destroy" things at a whim especially TLDs are off-limits unless NTIA and the root operator like Verisign (for A-roots) agree to it. If ICANN is supposed to control all TLDs I'd assume with ICANN still being based in the US most decisions would still have to get the blessing of the NTIA. PS: the list of his supporters speak volumes. He acts like ICANN is some form of UN just for the internet.

[Daerio]

Well, ICANN is located in the US. It's been criticized for working too closely with the DoC in the past and indeed, it is strongly regulated by the NTIA and can't simply "destroy" things at a whim especially TLDs are off-limits unless NTIA and the root operator like Verisign (for A-roots) agree to it. If ICANN is supposed to control all TLDs I'd assume with ICANN still being based in the US most decisions would still have to get the blessing of the NTIA. PS: the list of his supporters speak volumes. He acts like ICANN is some form of UN just for the internet.

You're saying bureaucratic red tape is stopping them. Excuse me for not having the same faith, especially in an age where people are constantly "exceeding their authority."

[Deleted]

Wouldn't an independent international organization with 162 member countries be less likely to be swayed by political interests as it relates to information access?

Not if a significant portion of them aren't secular democracies. It would become a similar charade as the UN Human Rights Council with shitpiles like Saudi Arabia in the lead -- except that this time they would genuinely have direct influence over everyone's freedoms, instead of just passing out supremely biased resolutions that any sane person can just ignore.

[Polyxo]

You're saying bureaucratic red tape is stopping them. Excuse me for not having the same faith, especially in an age where people are constantly "exceeding their authority."

None of those protocols physically 'control' anything. They're protocols. There's no switch turning on and off DNS functionality. All ICANN does in regards to any of this is recommend a standard way of doing things, so that all internet traffic can coordinate effectively.

[unbound]

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/internetcountdownclock/
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2782

Yes I know its a Cruz website just picking it because it has a neat clock.




Whelp what do you think the internet is going to be like when access can be controlled biased on what political groups don't like?

First of all, take what any politician tells you with a grain of salt. This is a wedge issue to get idiots excited...don't be one of the idiots.

The US doesn't own the "Internet", so there is not turning over control. In regards to this change, from the inception of ICANN, the US Government that the US role in the IANA functions would be temporary. The Commerce Department on June 10, 1998 stated that they are "committed to a transition that will allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management.” (Notice that we've had 2 different Presidents from each party since then)

Once again, just like the ACA, here is something that the Republicans have championed for a long time (privatization of a government function or creating a market) that they are going to use as a wedge issue just because a Democrat happens to be involved. Cisco, Google, the Brookings Institution (one of the few think tanks cited by Republicans as often as Democrats), and the Center for Democracy and Technology all support this.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/19/ame...-off-internet/

[Powerogue]

I was under the impression those countries were already doing that, such as the problem with censorship in China in particular. Is it that now that censorship could go both ways, and they'd prevent Americans from accessing those websites somehow?

[Polyxo]

I was under the impression those countries were already doing that, such as the problem with censorship in China in particular. Is it that now that censorship could go both ways, and they'd prevent Americans from accessing those websites somehow?

There is no issue. People who think there is an issue fundamentally don't understand what ICANN does, and how they work. They have no physical 'control' over anything. All they do is try to coordinate, and set standards for how everything will hopefully agree to do everything. But they have no actual control. If Russia wants to make some Rusnet on completely different protocols, they can, and there's nothing ICANN can do to stop them.

[THE Bigzoman]

Wouldn't an independent international organization with 162 member countries be less likely to be swayed by political interests as it relates to information access? Not sure why this is an issue, we have Republicans like Trump who are signing agreements with anti-pornography groups who want to limit pornography access in the United States.

Cruz is probably fear mongering due to evangelical Christians' concerns about one world government entities heralding the end times or something similar.

You're assuming all 162 countries would have the same degree of sway and power.

[stabetha]

It's not just about child porn. Grow up.

"seriously consider appointing a special commission" that's political double talk for " I don't give a fuck about your issue and won't do anything about it, but I want your vote".

Scared of some nonexistent porn stealing boogeyman and tells me to grow up LOL.