Meet the New Authoritarian Masters of the Internet

a reply to: kruphix

So being against globalism is socialism?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: yuppa

Not really...

Uh huh. so Global warming,and saying republicans want to make you slaves again isnt scare tactics?

scare tactics article. yes its a right leaning blog but read it anyway.

a reply to: TrueAmerican

I would imagine that Israel is somehow involved or has a controlling interest.

a reply to: yuppa

Articles on global warming aren't selling fear... it's right wing outlets and pseudoscience bloggers that say the media is trying to scare you into tax schemes (fear of taxes). WUWT notoriously twists words around to make articles or scientists sound like they are claiming things they are not, like we'll be under water in 2 years etc... when no one says anything remotely close to that.

So, no.

The same globalist pawns cone out and defend the globalist agenda in every thread.

Always making fun of everybody who is concerned about the non-stop flow of power and resources oit of the country.

It always assures me I am on the right side.

But despite EasyDNS and others’ outrage, the U.S. government says it’s gone that route hundreds of times. Furthermore, it says it has the right to seize any .com, .net and .org domain name because the companies that have the contracts to administer them are based on United States soil

The controversy highlights the unique control the U.S. continues to hold over key components of the global domain name system, and rips a Band-Aid off a historic sore point for other nations. A complicated web of bureaucracy and Commerce Department-dictated contracts signed in 1999 established that key domains would be contracted out to Network Solutions, which was acquired by VeriSign in 2000. That cemented control of all-important .com and .net domains with a U.S. company – VeriSign – putting every website using one of those addresses firmly within reach of American courts regardless of where the owners are located – possibly forever.

The government, Navas said, usually serves court-ordered seizures on VeriSign, which manages domains ending in .com, .net, .cc, .tv and .name, because “foreign-based registrars are not bound to comply with U.S. court orders.”

Link

But other governments are the fear for shutting down domain usage?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: worldstarcountry

After reading jonjonj's post on page one I'm inclined to believe that nothing will change simply because trillions of dollars flowing around isn't something that anyone is going to tolerate being messed around with.

It is what it is really. But scared bunnies will get scared.

Great time for a Cyberpunk atmosphere!

a reply to: Kali74

Uh huh. so saying things like were all gonna drown isnt scare tactics? Al gore is a prime example of scare tactictician.

a reply to: yuppa
Who said we're all gonna drown? Al Gore? When?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: gmoneystunt

I don't understand how control over domain names allows for control over any other aspect of the web. Control over domain names is not a filter.

I can see a potential privacy issue with whois, which unless it's been addressed is a big deal but that still is not the same thing as having the ability to filter content.

In other words if I control domain names and you request the name gmoneystunt.com and I just arbitrarily say no, how does that affect your ability to register a different name but publish the same content as you would have under the name you originally wanted?

Further how does it give anyone control over existing websites and access to those sites?

If you control the allocation and registering of domain names, and you deny me the registration of my desired domain name or domain names, than how am I going to register a domain name?

It's simple.

Similarly since you now control domain name registrations, you can for example remove the domain names for sites that have content that is critical of you.

That's obviously a simplification of it all.
Think of it another way. How do you view a website? You type it's URL address into the browser and click or hit enter.
Do you know any other way to get to that said website? No, most people do not know any other way to access that website beyond its URL..www.whatever...
So if the domain name is cancelled how are you going to view that site?

They don't need to go after the content.
If your site relies heavily on ad generated revenue to pay for hosting, how are you going to keep it up if nobody visits it?
Take out the bridge that 99% know as the only way, and it's over.
Now if they start targeting sites that educate people on how to directly access a website without using the www. domain address, eg via the servers IP address as one conspiracy theorists website uses for people to access in addition to his domain names, how are people going to know?
I'd hazard a guess and say most people are like you and don't think it's a problem so they won't research a way.

Now the issue is who do you believe?
Do you believe the Internet has essentially been handed over, or control of it to be precise?

Is this really a major issue?
Has ICANN been handed over?
If it has to whom and what are their intentions?
And what is the likelihood of that sort of censoring occurring..
I think most people will find its an over blown issue.
Above I wasn't suggesting may of that would happen btw.

a reply to: mortex

Has ICANN been handed over?

No.
Its contract with the US government has expired. It is now autonomous. Not that it was under much control anyway. We were just helping it pay its bills.

They want to globalize everything...except information.

Well,it looks like my mouth and my opinions will finally be shut off.

originally posted by: mortex

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: gmoneystunt

I don't understand how control over domain names allows for control over any other aspect of the web. Control over domain names is not a filter.

I can see a potential privacy issue with whois, which unless it's been addressed is a big deal but that still is not the same thing as having the ability to filter content.

In other words if I control domain names and you request the name gmoneystunt.com and I just arbitrarily say no, how does that affect your ability to register a different name but publish the same content as you would have under the name you originally wanted?

Further how does it give anyone control over existing websites and access to those sites?

If you control the allocation and registering of domain names, and you deny me the registration of my desired domain name or domain names, than how am I going to register a domain name?

It's simple.

Similarly since you now control domain name registrations, you can for example remove the domain names for sites that have content that is critical of you.

That's obviously a simplification of it all.
Think of it another way. How do you view a website? You type it's URL address into the browser and click or hit enter.
Do you know any other way to get to that said website? No, most people do not know any other way to access that website beyond its URL..www.whatever...
So if the domain name is cancelled how are you going to view that site?

They don't need to go after the content.
If your site relies heavily on ad generated revenue to pay for hosting, how are you going to keep it up if nobody visits it?
Take out the bridge that 99% know as the only way, and it's over.
Now if they start targeting sites that educate people on how to directly access a website without using the www. domain address, eg via the servers IP address as one conspiracy theorists website uses for people to access in addition to his domain names, how are people going to know?
I'd hazard a guess and say most people are like you and don't think it's a problem so they won't research a way.

Now the issue is who do you believe?
Do you believe the Internet has essentially been handed over, or control of it to be precise?

Is this really a major issue?
Has ICANN been handed over?
If it has to whom and what are their intentions?
And what is the likelihood of that sort of censoring occurring..
I think most people will find its an over blown issue.
Above I wasn't suggesting may of that would happen btw.

Thank you. This sort of explains the issue quite a bit better. I can see how this will be an issue. It may not affect bigger sites like Facebook, ATS, etc. We will have the same censorship issues as we have now, this will primarily effect other smaller sites. Which could be an issue in and of itself. If they can cut off dissidents from being heard on the internet, all TPTB need to do is wrest control from the big ones they would never be able to shut down (simply because they are just so big)

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: yuppa

Not really...

Indeed, left wing media does it a hell of a lot more.

As if control in the west isn't completely censored already. We never see any real oofos, the Benghazi attack was scripted theatre blaming a fake Anti Islamic 'film'. Oh and don't go looking too close for any bombing footage that isn't far way grainy whiteout flir of US airstrikes. These are but examples.

We can chat about the shadows dancing on the cave wall, we can't see the truth unless someone whistles it from a dark corner. You just look at how upset the weel gubment gets when Mannings, Assanges and Snowdens give us a tiny peek behind the curtain.

Stuff anyone that thinks china and russia are the only ones carrying censorship.

a reply to: Kali74

a reply to: TrueAmerican

Can someone explain to me how domain names has anything to do with banning content?

If I'm not mistaken they determine whether you exist or not.


"The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is a nonprofit organization that is responsible for coordinating the maintenance and procedures of several databases related to the namespaces of the internet.. ICANN performs the actual technical maintenance work of the central Internet address pools and DNS Root registries pursuant to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) function contract."

a reply to: nOraKat

If I'm not mistaken they determine whether you exist or not.

You are somewhat mistaken. The bylaws of the corporation do now allow it to arbitrarily remove or disallow a domain.

While it no longer is paid by the US government to perform its function, it is still bound by California corporate law.

Ah bollox, there goes my subscription to "Lady boy midget bondage porn".com


RA