In a recent interview, Tim Berners-Lee stated during the Web We Want festival, said, “I want a web where I’m not spied on, where there’s no censorship.” He warned that corporations and the governments want control of the Internet.
Mr. Lee is one of the Founders of the internet and it was he that came up with the WWW enabling a world wide system.
The US now controls the internet and it remains free, but there is talk of a UN control and taxing of internet use and, also, as Lee points out a fear of a corporate control or control by a Chinese system of government.
What would happen should the present philosophy of internet oversight be lost to a governmental or corporate censorship?
If the U controls the Internet how can it be free?
The US = corporations.
Thats the question. The US now has oversight authority and, so far, it remains free, Please try to respond to the question.
I did, maybe not in the way you wanted, but a valid response none the less.
Again, if the US controls the Internet how can it be free?
Why is being spied on by the US preferable to being spied on by the UN?
I am happy for you. Keep up the good work.
I suppose that more than just the NSA is "spying." Intelligence agencies are always spying in every way possible. Let's not suppose that British Intelligence isn't doing the same, that is if any is to be found in Britain.
Well American intelligence seems to rely on British intelligence rather a lot so, yes, you'll find that British intelligence spies on us for the Americans.
The U.S. has Great Britain spy on the United Nation headquarters. Then the information is exchanged. By that, I mean, the U.S. spies on the British Isles and hands the results over to their intelligence agencies. This way, neither the CIA or M16 can be accused of spying on their own soil. Both agencies are not supposed to spy within their own country. In the U.S., it is the National Security Agency that spies on Americans--regardless that their charter apparently doesn't allow for it, except on communication that are going abroad.
The biggest threats to the U.S. internet arise from companies like Comcast/TimeWarner. They want to charge more for faster webpage access. Yet, they claim it's in the name of net neutrality! If the FCC agrees to this, my own webpage (BillyKidd.com) would have second class availability for users. I don't have thousands of dollars to gain faster access.
And speaking of faster access, South Korea is working on putting in 1 gigabits downloads for everyone. Meanwhile, Verizon in the U.S. charges $79 a month for something like 50 megabits download--20 times slower!.
U.N. control of the internet would be controlled by the money and power of the major corporations representing each country. Sounds like chaos.
It cannot be free by any exercise of ones imagination.
The NSA is not a corporation.
The NSA is a government body. The USA government is controlled by corporations therefore the NSA is controlled by the corporations.
I am sure you are right, but simple one line statements or accusations seem to lack a, well, you know foundation or something that has been critically thought out. If it is the best you can do then, well, you know I am happy for you.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the US has used its indexing authority in any nefarious way. And being the indexing authority does not really come with any extra ability to spy on things. It just means you give every website its real numerical "address".
It goes a lot deeper than allocating internet addresses.
Ever heard of Dishfire?
Yes - it concerns collecting text messages and possibly other information from cell phones. I don't know of any connection to the internet - do you?
Yes, what does it have to do with this thread which is about the US being the indexer of the internet?
OK, so why should the USA be the sole indexer of the internet?
Do you think a committee of members from each country would do a better job? Or would you just choose a different country? China perhaps, so they could give a lift to the content thieves there?
No, I asked the question, answering a question with a question is weak.
I apologize; the question was intended to point out that I don't know of any superior option.
I thought you were a great supporter of private enterprise? Why does any country control internet indexing?
What would the price be? Meaning I don't really want to pay someone for doing that work, and companies do not work for free.
Some entity has to control it, and the current entity has an excellent record of conduct so far.
Because they are American or because anybody could do it?
Why what? Why does some entity need to do the indexing? I can't see everyone picking their own ip...
Why what? Why let them keep doing it because they are doing a good job? I think that is self-explanatory.
Why "some entity has to control it"
Just doing a good job isn't a reason, lot's of people do a good job but are stopped doing so.
Yes and so far no web content is filtered or banned for political content.
One can find all the most offensive and anti-humanity, anti'pro government, anti equality, crazy, wild eyed, extreme garbage on the internet in the US, not so in China. Please recall, China and Russia are both powerful members of the UN and both severely curtail speech. I would trust you Brits to run the internet before the UN.
The Brits already have a nation wide internet censoring plan under consideration by the government focused mainly on saving the delicate British people from porn. Ergo they would be the last ones I would choose.
China would be my last choice, as pornography is a tad less important to me than the free flow of all other kinds of information.
I have never heard of it. I have only heard some suggestions about paid throttling--not content based screening at a Federal level and never at the level of indexing.
Has someone discovered a problem with the US's control of the domain indexing protocol?
Everyone is aware that that is the ONLY dominance the US has in this discussion aren't they?
The NSA and "spying" stuff is completely unrelated to the topic. Right?
It would have helped if the OP had stated that the only concern was with domain indexing, instead it was a complaint about the UN controlling the internet which I assumed meant the internet! Silly me.
Buzz Kill, a nice donnybrook was shaping up.
by Eric Newland5 years ago
Myth: The Republican Party is the party of the rich.Fact: Conservative-headed households earn 6% less than liberal-headed households, on average.The flip side: Granted, an average doesn't tell the whole picture of...
by Stephen Hillmann5 years ago
In an increasingly online world, the vast majority of human conversation is taking place on websites hosted by corporations that have strict censorship policies. Most of these polices are set in place to...
by Kathryn L Hill2 years ago
I believe, any citizen who is motivated to survive and acts on it, assists the whole of the citizenry to spiral in a positive direction, manifesting as enthusiasm to survive, succeed and thrive. AND any gov't...
by Xenonlit4 years ago
The Republicans will not get away with this "Better off than four years ago" business. They already said that they will do anything to bring down the government and the first Black president. Apparently, they...
by Arthur Fontes7 years ago
How many people support the administration taking over the internet. Wouldn't that be wonderful?Let them silence dissidents Hooray!!Conform to the ideology or else. As the sheeple lay prone at the feet...
by Tammy Barnette4 years ago
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-574549 … ensorship/"Google reports it has seen an "alarming" incidence in government requests to censor Internet content in the past six months." "The Web...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.