Penny Arcade Forums› Debate and/or Discourse
The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Internet Regulation

TGN-XTGN-X Registered User new member
in Debate and/or Discourse
Anyone else seen this? It seems important, and PA tends to get enough traffic so that more ppl will find out. I'm really hoping this "top down" thing they are talking about doesn't happen, as the only ones who benefit from that approach are the ones at the top.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/11/01/one-month-until-regulate-internet/

Posts

  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    The UN can't actually enforce anything. So... not worried.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • CalixtusCalixtus Registered User regular
    That article was pretty short on specifics.

    "which critics say". Which critics of which specific proposals that have been made? Have these proposals any inclination of actually being passed?

    "Despite those reassurances, key experts remain concerned." Which key experts? What are they concerned about?

    -This message was deviously brought to you by:
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    Also, it's Fox News. Need I say more?

    488W936.png
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    basically a UN/industry conference will make a bunch of recommendations which most of its members will proceed to ignore

    also the main ''critic" they quote seems to be some guy from a shady looking 'legal advice' website

    hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
    that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
  • nescientistnescientist Registered User regular
    So if you go to the WICTleaks site, which is pretty much the only substance in that otherwise content-free article, and click on the United States' proposal, you'll see that the first few paragraphs of introduction are largely dedicated to opposing doing anything about content or censorship. Which, unfortunately, is not the same thing as opposing censorship; they reaffirm that sovereign states currently have the right to restrict content for criminal reasons, national security, et cetera et cetera. I don't have the patience to read all of the other documents, but if you're looking for a boring legal document that actually represents international intent to control the contents of the internet, check out ACTA.

    Anyway this reeks of crap; I could be wrong, but it just smells to me. The stuff they're trying to scare you with is reminiscent of the consequences of losing net neutrality. But that doesn't make any goddamned sense, because if there were any actual threat of that happening Fox News would be the first to tell you that it was a triumph for freedom and we should all be pleased to be so very free. There is no mention of a plausible motive or mechanism (WICT is not such a mechanism) for the institution of a "top-down" internet; with net neutrality both of these are obviously present, yet the term is conspicuously absent from this article.

  • HolioHolio Registered User regular
    Let's hope the UN never gets control of the internets then...

Sign In or Register to comment.
Penny Arcade Forums› Debate and/or Discourse