It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

U.S. aims to give up control over Internet administration

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:07 PM
reply to post by Libertygal

So leverage, I see it now, darn I should have given more attention to what Snowden has been telling all this time about the shady business of the Obama administration, the NSA and retribution.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:10 PM
reply to post by xuenchen

Wow.. nice work! Again, amazing. There is simply no reason to force that to be anonymous, and, in fact, most providers allow anonymity if you request it. Ie, Godaddy, etc.

One of the other things I saw, and meant to go back to, was sonething about a waiver and improperly assigned domains, then ICANN getting huge dumps of domain registrations handed over to them from multiple third party vendors, which names I cannot recall, but I THINK Godaddy was one.

I only mention that, because last time I looked, ATS was registered through there, though that may have changed. I have not looked in a while, but I remember some kerfuffle at some point, because people swore it was CIA. blah, blah, blah, because it came back to Godaddy, there by the CIA. Lol.

Anyway, a million thoughts in my head, right now.

Going to see if ICANN find that waiver and domain dump stuff.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:16 PM
Here's a simple algorithm, which predicts the catastrophic failure of a sovereign World Wide Web.

" Israel wants a United Nations of cyberspace -- During the CyberTech 2014 conference held in Israel on Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed establishing “a kind of UN of the Internet” led by the government of Israel."

" Speech in Israel is not free -- Multiple laws, policies, and court rulings in Israel violate nearly every freedom enumerated in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, including freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of peaceable assembly."

edit on 14-3-2014 by seasoul because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:19 PM
reply to post by speculativeoptimist

I'm sorry I missed your post, but I have only read a tiny bit about the Outternet. I would definitely have to look more into that, but, with the advent of this revelation, if this news gets spread widely enough, I can actually see that grabbing attention.

All it would really require is the company to purchase the satellite space. Not sure how prevalent it is, but launching their own at this time would be cost prohibitive without a huge, rich investor. Small, multi investors won't cut that cost.

And, all the big players are already in the Obama pocket, from Gates, to Google, to Facebook. It would simply be more of the same.

The idea, I think, would be to get away from that, not more of the same under a new name.

Certainly, another aspect to explore, however, but, keep in mind, nothing is free. There will be spam, advertisers, etc. There has to be, commercialism sells. Sad, but true.

ETA - also keep in mind, wifi, open signals, are far easier to hack. I still used a wired router for internet, and my husband added a seperate wireless, very secured router for our phone access. But, he has it protected 6 ways to Sunday.

edit on 14-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:24 PM
reply to post by seasoul

You are not far from the truth, I just read an article that one expert sees this new "governance of the net" in the hands of foreign interest to create a splintered internet, where to many interest will be trying to enforce their own views that could conflict with the US constitutional rights.

This means in my opinion that whatever the new "international entity" that will take over some aspects of the internet will likely appoint some type of internet governor, we may see some changes in what we in America call freedoms as many other countries and citizens do not share the same kind of rights that US do, will this create a new type of internet here in the US? remember we are well know for inovations.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:44 PM
Well as I keep digging on the issue of the soon to become a new "intenet governance" it seems that already two independent groups are taking the step to hold their own meetings as to how they are going to share control.

Icann will conduct a meeting that will be the first step in the transition process, beginning March 23 in Singapore.

“We are inviting governments, the private sector, civil society and other Internet organizations from the whole world to join us in developing this transition process,” said Fadi Chehadé, the president and chief executive of Icann. “All stakeholders deserve a voice in the management and governance of this global resource as equal partners.”

And also,

President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil canceled a planned visit to the United States last year and called the activities “an assault on national sovereignty and individual rights” and “incompatible with relations between friendly nations.”

Brazil also announced it would host Net Mundial, a global meeting on Internet governance, in April in São Paulo to discuss the coming transition.

Now I see why some experts are saying that this will cause the internet to become splintered

I think that is going to be a toggle war of who is going to take over.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:47 PM

Time for a reliable and more free people friendly underground internet, that is what we need now, and independent internet to rival the very soon to become another corporate control monopoly.

Internet as we know it is for sell.

everyone should get a IRC program

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 10:51 PM
reply to post by eastcoastdaddy

Please elaborate on that, I may no be familiar with that program.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:00 PM
reply to post by marg6043

You can google mirc, which is a windows interface to allow you to connect to IRC, also known as internet relay chat. It is basically peer to peer connections, which lessens the chance of outside interference. It does not eliminate it, however, but it does seem to largely be untapped by the government as yet, possibly because it is not extensively used.

It is one of those many parts of the "internet" people don't know about, because most people think the internet is what is on their browsers, and nothing more, which is far from true.

With mirc, you download a list of channels, and can join based on inteterests. You can even make your own channel, and invite friends. Many people use it for not good things, so as with anything, be careful.

edit on 14-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:04 PM
reply to post by Libertygal

I forgot that I have a son that is computer savvy, I will ask him about it, perhaps this will work of him, but me, I am not into social media I am more of a ATS member only and do a lot of research and shopping around.

But if things get crazy with the net once a toggle war starts with the issue of governance I will tell my son to check on alternatives.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:06 PM
reply to post by marg6043

Oddly enough, this comes on the heels of Zuckerburg phoning Obama this week, as well, with concerns over government hacking and snooping, spoofing Facebook. Wow.

Mark Zuckerberg Condemns
Feds for Using Facebook to
Hack Into Computers
The U.S. government's online surveillance is
jeopardizing the Internet as we know it,
Facebook's CEO wrote Thursday.

Little did he know, eh?

"The U.S. government should be the champion for the Internet, not a threat," Zuckerberg wrote on his Facebook page. "They need to be much more transparent about what they're doing, or otherwise people will believe the worst."

I wonder what old Zuck thinks now?

Think he knew this was coming?

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:08 PM
In my humble opinion, IRC is like TOR. It's not as secure by a world's distance..but it's the same wild wild west atmosphere in some areas, for anything goes and the law is for jokes and bumper stickers, not to follow.

Many web providers and even among dedicated rack space providers have limitations our outright prohibitions on IRC servers being run on anything touching their networks, largely due to that atmosphere and security issues.

It's a great place for experienced and wary folks...It's a great place for babes in the woods to become dinner in some troll's cooking pot, too. It all buyer beware and enter with caution is my best advice.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by Libertygal

I read about that, thanks for putting it together to understand how timely the news about "freeing the internet" is. Still the response of the US is to handle the net to be hacked away when foreign interest groups or countries decide that they want to be the ones to control it.


But as usual I could only imagine that already the Rockefellers have decided whom will be taking over.

posted on Mar, 14 2014 @ 11:23 PM
Sell off the internet to multinational organizations.

Re-brand the NSA as something else.


posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 12:39 AM
the internet has been working very well. it's transformed the world, and I think it has done so in an overwhelmingly positive manner. I don't see why this should be changed. they haven't given one reason why it should.

posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 04:06 AM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Forgive me but you sound like you think that the USA owns the internet and has given it away

Make no mistake it is not yours to give away, own or control and what we are seeing today is people across the world fighting back against spying and censorship by the all america big names that only became big because of finance from the CIA/MOSSAD/NSA

Take that away and it becomes worthless, nothing to even give away

posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 04:49 AM
I seem to have a totally different take on this from everyone else. First of all, for those not aware, ICANN is basically responsible for setting standards on internet traffic, not on content but rather on the form data transmission takes. They partition out who gets what IP blocks and handle things like top level domains for dns servers.

Currently the US controls this. Mainly because we created it, and basically told the world you can trust us, we aren't going to use this extra access for anything nefarious.

Snowden however revealed that we can't be trusted, and that we are using our privileged internet capabilities to spy on everyone and everything. I get the feeling this giving up of control is simply a result of political pressure. In all honesty having it go somewhere like the UN isn't a totally bad thing.

It's more the symbolic loss than anything, it's a visual representation of the US's slide from having a free and open culture into one that is anything but.

posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 05:06 AM
Oh Fart! ive been waiting for years for my ship to come in,....and now I see its probly CENSORSHIP>

posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 05:28 AM
Interesting.... all this ties nicely with what the 'Father' of the internet said a few days ago ?

Sir Tim Berners Lee

posted on Mar, 15 2014 @ 08:28 AM
UN-sponsored corporate movement for environment and good governance accused of cutting membership out of key decisions

This title shows exactly how the UN will rule the net.

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in