Internet ID for Americans

This isn't news. Something along this line has been in the pipeline for years, as well as the numerous other schemes to restrict the internet like abolishing net neutrality, SOPA and PIPA. They'll get away with something like this eventually, under the guise of cracking down on illegal activities such as child pornography. They already nabbed wiretapping rights under the Bush administration.

"They'll get away with something like this eventually..."

Another reason why the election of 2012 is critical.

1. The Left understands the importance of control of the avenues of information dissemination. An important member of the Obama team, and Mark Lloyd’s new boss at the FCC, Julius Genachowski…classmate of Obama at Columbia, and at Harvard Law….and a top fundraiser.

2. Genachowski’s press sec’y is Jen Howard, who was Robert McChesney’s press director at the Leftist ‘Free Press.’ Jen Howard Named Genachowski's Press Secretary | Benton Foundation


3. Free Press was founded by Robert McChesney, and on his board sat Marxist Van Jones, former ‘Green Jobs Czar’ for Obama.

4. Insight into Free Press, and the Center for American Progress can be seen in “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” co-authored by Mark Lloyd. The following from their policy report: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/06/pdf/talk_radio.pdf

a. “…more than 90 percent of Americans ages 12 or older listen to radio each week, “a higher penetration than television, magazines, newspapers, or the Internet.”… Americans listened on average to 19 hours of radio per week in 2006…conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format…91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive

b. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand….Ownership diversity is perhaps the single most important variable contributing to the structural imbalance based on the data.


5. “This slanted paper whines that AM talk radio is dominated by conservative views and suggests that liberal views should be forced upon the talk radio industry. That left-wing idea, of course, is bad enough, but the group that Lloyd was working with to have the paper published shows ties to left-wingers, out right Marxists and other haters of this country and that connection should have disqualified Lloyd for service in the federal government. at the end of September of 2001, right after the Twin Towers fell, McChesney said that the United States was the, “leading terrorist institution in the world today.” In February of 2009, McChesney recommended that capitalism be “dismantled” in the U.S.A. “It is typical communist boilerplate. In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles. This is something that the great majority of the population will undoubtedly learn in the course of their struggles for a more equal, more humane, more collective, and more sustainable world. In the meantime, it is time to begin to organize a revolt against the ruling class–imposed ceiling on civilian government spending and social welfare in U.S. society.”( A New New Deal under Obama? :: Monthly Review)
Another of Obama’s Radical Appointees : Stop The ACLU


6. Phil Kerpen, of the conservative think tank, Americans for Prosperity, blasted the FCC for being in bed with Free Press: ‘AFP was reacting to an email sent out under FCC Spokeswoman Jen Howard’s name by Free Press discussing FCC’s intent to advance net neutrality regulations. Free Press is a well-known advocate of government intervention in the Internet and Howard’s attempt to have one foot in and one foot out of government at the same time is outrageous.

“Free Press was founded by left-wing extremists who want to destroy private ownership of the media and the Internet. It was bad enough that the Federal Communications Commission hired Free Press’s former spokesperson, Jen Howard. Now we see that she is still apparently working for Free Press,” said AFP Policy Director Phil Kerpen. “Now that Howard is running the press office for FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski it is shocking that she would still be a soldier for a left-wing advocacy group.”
Free Press is the brainchild of Robert McChesney who wrote a column last year advising President Obama: “In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick-by-brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”
“The FCC has put on a false front that it is honestly interested in the public’s feedback on its efforts to regulate the Internet,” said Kerpen. “Today’s revelation that it is sharing employees with a group that is dedicated to destroying our free market system is unacceptable.” ‘ FCC Official Spokeswoman Still Working for ‘Free Press’ – Common American Journal


6. Robert McChesney, former editor of Monthly Review, a leading Marxist publication, has dangerously close ties to the Obama administration, … McChesney created the “media reform” organization Free Press, and served on the board of Norman Solomon‘s Institute for Public Accuracy. He remains on the board of Monthly Review, which has a half-century history of supporting Communist movements and regimes.Echoing President Obama’s media diversity czar Mark Lloyd, McChesney supports Venezuela’s Marxist strongman Hugo Chavez and that country’s crackdown on the media. He even argued that owners of an opposition TV station that had been critical of Chavez should be arrested for treason.

7. “What the hard core reformistas really want, it seems, is not diversity or an open debate but a media that promotes their own vision of society and the world.” That’s exactly right and, more specifically, as I argued in my 2005 Media Myths book, the media reformistas want to impose this control by taking the fantasy that “the public owns the [broadcast] airwaves” and extending it to ALL media platforms and outlets. In other words, McChesney and the Free Press want an UnFree Press. To cast things in neo-Marxist terms that they could appreciate, they want to take control of the information means of production. And it begins, McChesney argues, by all of us having to give up this “sort of religious attachment to the idea of a ‘free-press’” from which we all suffer. Free Press, Robert McChesney & the “Struggle” for Media
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News


Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!

This is last years story. But it appears that legislation in the pipeline could wreck the plan.

The government has committed multi-millions to helping the private sector build an identity layer for the Internet. But one analyst says either the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA) could result in one government action rendering another moot and bungling the promise of secure IDs
SOPA and PIPA have brought howls of protest, rumors of Internet blackouts and now has the potential to alter the identity and access management landscape.

“There are interdependencies of services that are not immediately obvious and identity is one of those services,” says Glazer. “It’s hard to black out part of a domain and think it will not have consequences in other areas.”

Glazer argues that the protocol layer of connections that define the relationships between sites that provide user identities (called an identity provider or IDP) and sites that rely on those identities to validate users (called relying parties or RPs) is in jeopardy under SOPA and PIPA.

He says sites such as universities, multiple-service ISPs and credential providers hit with a SOPA DNS lockout would not be able to share identity information and therefore would not be able to authenticate users.

He gives the example of a university professor who logs into her network and uses that credential, via identity federation protocols, to authenticate to an online document service. In that model, the university domain and the document service domain must communicate. If either side is invisible within DNS the professor is locked out of her service.

“If you have credentials and user attributes you can’t gather from a domain, all the down stream RPs fail, and that breaks the federation,” said Glazer.

Users would be locked out or left registering a username and password with each individual site they visit on the Web.

“That is opposite of what NSTIC is trying to do,” says Glazer, who blogged about the issues on the Gartner blog network.

NSTIC is the nearly year-old National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which just received $16.5 million in funding in the 2012 federal budget.

NSTIC, introduced in April last year, outlines the parameters for an “identity ecosystem” to be built and managed by the private sector. For example, Google, PayPal, Symantec and Equifax are already certified ID credential providers.

The program, now under the control of the Commerce Department, is not about a national ID card, but about an infrastructure to help stimulate and secure online interactions and transactions.
SOPA lining up to poison identity federations, expert says | ZDNet
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News
:banana2::banana2::banana2:
Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!

as long as it keeps me safe from terrorism and right wing extremist Im all for it
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News
:banana2::banana2::banana2:
Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!

as long as it keeps me safe from terrorism and right wing extremist Im all for it
Good Obamabot.
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News
:banana2::banana2::banana2:
Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!

as long as it keeps me safe from terrorism and right wing extremist Im all for it

Just like to make clear that none of Megan's emoticons were part of my post....and were added by eots.
 
I am not intimidated by this idea. But, shouldn't this be a world wide issue and not just American? If this isn't about stopping illegal immigration or violating our individual civil rights, well, OK. But what is the point? Preventing internet fraud, ID theft and all, that is fine. But if some guy in Russia has stolen/copied/cloned digitally my fingerprints or retinal patterns or what ever techno crap they do , how is the US government going to stop that? It’s like the arms race, one measure can be almost always be countered. So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News


Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!



its ironic that the same people who want legal voters to not get to vote because they don't have ID are in favor of identity theft being easy.


The system is VOLUNTARY for crissakes. Go put on your aluminum hat.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone actually bother to read the article?

Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential, if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said.
 
I am not intimidated by this idea. But, shouldn't this be a world wide issue and not just American? If this isn't about stopping illegal immigration or violating our individual civil rights, well, OK. But what is the point? Preventing internet fraud, ID theft and all, that is fine. But if some guy in Russia has stolen/copied/cloned digitally my fingerprints or retinal patterns or what ever techno crap they do , how is the US government going to stop that? It’s like the arms race, one measure can be almost always be countered. So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?

"So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?"

Your post gets right to the heart of the issue.

It is interesting to note, as well, that during the Chris Hayes Show, "UP," this weekend, it was pointed out that those nations with the least piracy protections have the least piracy....
....curious.

So, what is government really trying to do here?
Some of our less astute -or more trusting- friends seem not able to connect dots.
 
I am not intimidated by this idea. But, shouldn't this be a world wide issue and not just American? If this isn't about stopping illegal immigration or violating our individual civil rights, well, OK. But what is the point? Preventing internet fraud, ID theft and all, that is fine. But if some guy in Russia has stolen/copied/cloned digitally my fingerprints or retinal patterns or what ever techno crap they do , how is the US government going to stop that? It’s like the arms race, one measure can be almost always be countered. So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?

"So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?"

Your post gets right to the heart of the issue.

It is interesting to note, as well, that during the Chris Hayes Show, "UP," this weekend, it was pointed out that those nations with the least piracy protections have the least piracy....
....curious.

It was pointed out by whom and based on what factual evidence? In addition, who the fuck cares?


So, what is government really trying to do here?
Some of our less astute -or more trusting- friends seem not able to connect dots.
images
 
I am not intimidated by this idea. But, shouldn't this be a world wide issue and not just American? If this isn't about stopping illegal immigration or violating our individual civil rights, well, OK. But what is the point? Preventing internet fraud, ID theft and all, that is fine. But if some guy in Russia has stolen/copied/cloned digitally my fingerprints or retinal patterns or what ever techno crap they do , how is the US government going to stop that? It’s like the arms race, one measure can be almost always be countered. So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?

"So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?"

Your post gets right to the heart of the issue.

It is interesting to note, as well, that during the Chris Hayes Show, "UP," this weekend, it was pointed out that those nations with the least piracy protections have the least piracy....
....curious.

It was pointed out by whom and based on what factual evidence? In addition, who the fuck cares?


So, what is government really trying to do here?
Some of our less astute -or more trusting- friends seem not able to connect dots.
images

"Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.
1. Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.

https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/
 
"So, what is Obama realy trying to do here?"

Your post gets right to the heart of the issue.

It is interesting to note, as well, that during the Chris Hayes Show, "UP," this weekend, it was pointed out that those nations with the least piracy protections have the least piracy....
....curious.

It was pointed out by whom and based on what factual evidence? In addition, who the fuck cares?


So, what is government really trying to do here?
Some of our less astute -or more trusting- friends seem not able to connect dots.
images

"Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.
1. Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.

https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/

Nice non-sequitor.
 
Last edited:
It was pointed out by whom and based on what factual evidence? In addition, who the fuck cares?



images

"Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.
1. Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.

https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/

Nice non-sequitor.

"(Reuters) - Lawmakers stopped anti-piracy legislation in its tracks on Friday, delivering a stunning win for Internet companies that staged an unprecedented online protest this week to kill the previously fast-moving bills.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he would postpone a critical vote that had been scheduled for January 24 "in light of recent events."

Lamar Smith, the Republican chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, followed suit, saying his panel would delay action on similar legislation until there is wider agreement on the issue.

Senator Ron Wyden introduced a bill last month that he said "meets the same publicly stated goals as SOPA or Protect IP without causing massive damage to the Internet."

Representative Darrel Issa on Wednesday introduced a companion bill in the House.

Issa said SOPA and PIPA lacked a fundamental understanding of how Internet technologies work. "
Congress puts brakes on anti-piracy bills | Reuters
 
Well they are already doing this;
Seizures of web sites by ICE and the DOJ without the protection of the 14th Amendment requirements of Due Process are becoming almost commonplace.
So why not more?
They don't give a rats ass about our constitution.
I have noticed since last year, that you can get all kinds of ideology and info on the Democrats,when you goggle, but very few and far between ideology or information on the repubs.
What a coincidence eh?


Thought it was only me who was thinking this ..... I dont trust them.

PodOmatic | Best Free Podcasts


Explicit%20content.gif
 
Short of having a fingerprint or retina scan entry module, I don't see how this could really work, and then it could still be fudged.

You might be surprised what even John Q Public can find out even now, given a little homework-

What Is My IP Address? Lookup IP, Hide IP, Change IP, Trace IP and more...

There really is no anonymity on the web if someone wants to know.
The people should say no to i-net Id's (IMHO), and just call upon government to do their jobs by going after individuals who are bad, instead of making everyone lose their privacy to the government and their rights all at the same time.. They could do this enforcement and/or police work better against the individuals who are bad, while leaving intact the good peoples privacy and identities, but I think there is something larger in play here..
 
1. "STANFORD, Calif.--President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

2. "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said

3. ... privacy and civil-liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

4. The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace,...

5. "We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system.

6. ...reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

7. Details about the "trusted identity" project are remarkably scarce.

8. ...anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet..."
Obama Eyeing Internet ID for Americans - Tech Talk - CBS News


Ya' know, it this was anybody else but Obama...I might not trust 'em...

But, it's Barak...so I know everything will be on the up and up!



its ironic that the same people who want legal voters to not get to vote because they don't have ID are in favor of identity theft being easy.


The system is VOLUNTARY for crissakes. Go put on your aluminum hat.

Once again, the uninformed are the most easily led...as is the case of Poo, above.

This attempt to censor the internet is both aimed at handing billions to the friends of Obama, and being able to threaten those who have opinions other than the party line.


Testimony form a movie mogul, who makes the point that they ordered the Democrats to pass this legislation to insure their profits:

"The moguls are reminding Obama et al that, in the words of one studio chief, “God knows how much money we’ve given to Obama and the Democrats and yet they’re not supporting our interests. There’s been no greater supporters of him than we’ve been from the first day and the first fundraisers continuing until he was elected. We all were pleased. And, at its heart institutionally, Hollywood supports the Democrats. Now we need the administration to support us. This is a very important time for Hollywood."
Hollywood's Obama Donors On President's Piracy Stand: Not Give A Dime Anymore



This, from the same article, was also interesting, as it explains the resistence of Liberals to the "Citizens United" case.

"The boycott even extends to many of the moguls’ families who also are big Obama and Democratic Party donors. The situation is serious because many moguls and/or their families comprise Obama’s top bundlers in the TV/movie/music biz. Bundlers as defined by opensecrets.org are “people with friends in high places who, after bumping against personal contribution limits, turn to those friends, associates, and, well, anyone who’s willing to give, and deliver the checks to the candidate in one big ‘bundle’.” These donors direct more money to the candidates than anyone else. As of September 2011 these 357 elite bundlers were directing at least $55,900,000 for Obama’s re-election efforts — money that has gone into the coffers of his campaign as well as the Democratic National Committee, according to opensecrets.org. That figure by now has significantly increased and will continue to do so."


Heaven forfend anybody but the Left has access to government!
 
Last edited:
Granny says dey better not try to take her internet away or dey liable to draw back a bloody nub...
:eusa_shifty:
Next Six Months Could Determine Fate of the Internet, FCC Commissioner Warns
June 8, 2012 – Actions taken, or not taken, by proponents of online freedom within the next six months will decide the fate of the Internet, according to Federal Communications Commission commissioner Robert McDowell.
“Six months separate us from the renegotiation of the 1988 treaty that led to insulating the Internet from economic and technical regulation,” McDowell, a Republican, told lawmakers during a hearing on Capitol Hill last week. “What proponents of Internet freedom do or don’t do between now and then will determine the fate of the Net and effect global economic growth as well as determine whether political liberty can proliferate,” he said. On December 4, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a Geneva-based U.N. specialized agency, will convene in Dubai to discuss its ongoing review of international telecommunications regulations (ITRs).

The Internet does not currently fall within the scope of the ITRs, but some ITU members, including Russia, India, China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, have long been promoting U.N. oversight of the Internet, and are expected to push for it at the Dubai conference. The U.S. House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on communications and technology held a hearing on May 31, entitled “International Proposals to Regulate the Internet.” “During the treaty negotiations the most lethal threat to Internet freedom may not come from a full frontal assault, but through insidious and seemingly innocuous expansions of intergovernmental powers,” McDowell told the panel.

He warned that “subterranean efforts” to expand intergovernmental powers were already underway. He cited the ITU leadership’s insistence that the ITU does not plan on expanding regulatory powers, and that if any regulations are implemented as a result of the meeting they should be of “the light touch variety.” “It is not possible to insulate the Internet from new rules while also establishing a ‘light touch’ regulatory regime,” McDowell said. “Either a new legal paradigm will emerge in December or it won’t.” Specifically, ITU members and officials have been discussing an alleged “phone numbers crisis” – concerns that the world is running out of phone numbers, an area over which the ITU does have some authority.

Phone numbers are used for some Internet services, such as Skype and Google Voice. “To function properly, the software supporting these services translate traditional phone numbers into IP addresses,” McDowell explained. Russia has seized on this fact, and is proposing giving the ITU jurisdiction over IP addresses – essentially the ID number of each individual computer – to remedy the supposed crisis. “What is left unsaid, however, is that potential ITU jurisdiction over IP addresses would enable it to regulate Internet services and devices with abandon,” Mc Dowell warned. Other “seemingly small” proposed changes to the U.N.’s regulatory authority – such as a submission from Arab states to change the rules definition of “telecommunications” to cover “processing” and other computer functions – were in fact “titanic in scope,” he said.

‘Drive up costs, inhibit innovation’
 
Both sides of the political spectrum need to get their paws off of the internet. It is the single biggest factror in changing the world today, and should be left as free as possible.

The freedom of the net is a threat to the powers that be! Bloggers and social sites like Facebook and Twitter have the potential to bring down a CEO or a politican faster then ever, with little or no time for damage control.
 

Forum List

Back
Top