FCC Moves to Regulate Internet

[GostHacked]

Couldnt a competitor to ICANN emerge if was able to attract enough resolvers to to point at their root and TLDS, and eventually become authoritative in the same way ICANNs 13 machines are? Is the problem that it would be impossible to build the consensus required?

How would you adopt it to work with the existing internet?

[dre]

How would you adopt it to work with the existing internet?

Through a campaign to register your root in all the resolvers. The only thing that makes ICANN authoritative is that all the DNS resolvers clone the data from its servers. DNS resolvers can pull data from other places as well, and often do. The challenge would be to build universal consensus that your system has value. The more resolvers you can convince the more users will be able to resolve your names.

[bjre]

Before we go too far down this road, you might need to be reminded that most of the infrastructure of the Internet, basic protocols and such, were in fact invented by Americans working for the American government, and at least initial roll-outs were pretty much completely funded by the American government. Those protocols and standards were adopted by other countries, but certain core infrastructure functions remained in American hands.

As to the rest of your post, well, it's just a bunch non-sequiturs strung together. You're giving me a pretty good picture of the penis envy the Chinese have for the US, though.

Yes, American companies define the protocols, and standards, and force others to use it, and kill other standards, and make lots of that to be confidential. So that only small number of companies profit from it.

What they did is just the same as what Apple did, who tell others that flash is slow but just make Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs for hardware accelerator. http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/does_html5_really_beat_flash_surprising_results_of_new_tests.php . That is what they always did. Countless standards and system had been killed by US companies, include Europe Galileo satellite system, which is almost killed. In this way they make huge profit that are more than any explicit robbery.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes, American companies define the protocols, and standards, and force others to use it, and kill other standards, and make lots of that to be confidential. So that only small number of companies profit from it.

Nobody forced to use...make your own internet.

What they did is just the same as what Apple did, who tell others that flash is slow but just make Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs for hardware accelerator.

Too bad...no can copy Apple. Make own.

That is what they always did. Countless standards and system had been killed by US companies, include Europe Galileo satellite system, which is almost killed. In this way they make huge profit that are more than any explicit robbery.

Correct...Chines just copy Americans...even copy mistakes.

[bjre]

Correct...Chines just copy Americans...even copy mistakes.

American use paper and printing technology, both the 2 technologies are copy from China.

[bush_cheney2004]

American use paper and printing technology, both the 2 technologies are copy from China.

No....China steal ideas from Egypt.

[GostHacked]

No....China steal ideas from Egypt.

Pointless.

[bush_cheney2004]

Pointless.

I know...but fun to play with bjre.

[bush_cheney2004]

Because we dont live in a vacuum, and because Americans are our neighbors. I want people all over the world to be able to use the internet as they have been, and if you allow carriers to arbitrarily block content then the landscape will change in a way that harms consumers.

Americans as "your neighbors" is irrelevant in an "all over the world" context for the Internet. The "landscape" changed because the Americans changed it to begin with, and if America decides to regulate via FCC classification it is long overdue:

The FCC has examined three different ways to classify broadband Internet service and providers. The vote on Thursday will enable the FCC to continue its inquest into how best to classify and regulate the Web. The FCC wants to specifically look at whether broadband Internet should continue to be classified as an "information service;" or if its classification should change to a "telecommunication service." There is also a possible "third way" which would leave Internet content and applications unregulated under the Federal Communications Act, identifying wired broadband service as a telecommunications service.

[GostHacked]

I know...but fun to play with bjre.

I was referring to yourself.

[bush_cheney2004]

I was referring to yourself.

You always do....no autographs please!