If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   The US is fighting hard to keep the UN from taking over the internet, which it's going to need in order to Google what all those secret signals on the back of roadsigns mean   (foxnews.com) divider line 10
    More: Asinine, Google, International Telecommunication Union, veto power  
•       •       •

5940 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Dec 2012 at 8:18 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-04 08:27:52 AM  
5 votes:

DreamSnipers: A rare time I am proud of my countries policies. We are actually standing up for freedom.


No. They're not. They're standing up for the ability to let the MPAA and associated lobbyists regulate the internet, instead of the UN.

That's all this is. And sure, protectionism is fine, but the bottom line is that I'd rather have the UN regulate the internet than the MPAA. Though either way is farked, and if it was up to me, the answer would be 'none of the above'.
2012-12-04 09:05:47 AM  
3 votes:
An Account To Make Comments
DreamSnipers:
A rare time I am proud of my countries policies. We are actually standing up for freedom.

Maybe I'm overly cynical this morning, but I'm thinking it has more to do with who gets to take those freedoms away.



What standing up for Internet freedom looks like:

i.imgur.com
2012-12-04 08:37:09 AM  
2 votes:

starsrift: DreamSnipers: A rare time I am proud of my countries policies. We are actually standing up for freedom.

No. They're not. They're standing up for the ability to let the MPAA and associated lobbyists regulate the internet, instead of the UN.

That's all this is. And sure, protectionism is fine, but the bottom line is that I'd rather have the UN regulate the internet than the MPAA. Though either way is farked, and if it was up to me, the answer would be 'none of the above'.


This. The paid whores in DC cannot let the UN regulate what they have to let the US interests control.

It would ruin the NSA or MPAA or whoever wants to both sue us and wiretap our every online second if another agency had control.
2012-12-04 08:31:59 AM  
2 votes:

DreamSnipers: A rare time I am proud of my countries policies. We are actually standing up for freedom.


Maybe I'm overly cynical this morning, but I'm thinking it has more to do with who gets to take those freedoms away.
2012-12-04 08:18:40 AM  
2 votes:
The Internet was created by us. The US did most the research, the US built most the backbones, the US set most the standards.

Do you think we would give up that kind of power? Hell no.

If UN wants control then they have to make their own, simple as that.
2012-12-04 10:47:36 AM  
1 votes:

pute kisses like a man: blah blah blah words words

think of it, how many internet service provider options to you have? maybe 2 or 3 at most. there is no competition (for me, it's either cable or dsl, you have 2 distinct options). they are aware of this and realize they have all of the bargaining power. these are the relationships where regulations are most important. 

/ dnrtfa
// but, i think there needs to be some internet regulation to protect users from providers.
/// but no regulation for content


Except they aren't discussing regulating service providers. They are discussing regulating content.

We are WAAAY too far beyond regulating service providers. I think in the late 90's when telco's started buying up small ISP's and making it insanely expensive for a non-telco ISP to offer ISDN, ADSL or SDSL services, is really when OUR government should have stepped in and said no to allowing a telco to provide internet services - but that didn't happen. And because that is local infrastructure, I don't see where the UN could stand on regulating that.
2012-12-04 10:27:48 AM  
1 votes:

Great Janitor: The UN or the MPAA/RIAA. Neither is a choice I want, but honestly, it's better the devil you know.


i agree, I'd take the UN as well. an international convention whose power is born of treaties with the goal towards a better world and humanitarian aid. or, a group of lobbyists who want to completely bottleneck the delivery of information so that prices can remain unnecessarily high.
2012-12-04 10:11:04 AM  
1 votes:
Let's entertain for a moment that this did happen. What would stop Google or Amazon or some other large service from setting up their services directly with the customer? Or even setting up themselves with a company that customers would connect to that would directly interface with Google or Amazon. I mean, this could end up creating competing Internets... and look how well that worked out for AOL.
2012-12-04 09:14:16 AM  
1 votes:
The UN or the MPAA/RIAA. Neither is a choice I want, but honestly, it's better the devil you know.
2012-12-04 08:24:42 AM  
1 votes:
"The U.S. does not have veto power over resolutions adopted at this U.N. conference, but it does have the right not to implement regulations that are adopted."

So it's basically a dog and pony show that can be ignored, and all we voters need to do is make certain our Congresscritters don't try and use this as another power grab.

Don't go messing with our Internet. That would be the one thing that would get we basement dwellers to come out into the sun.
 
Displayed 10 of 10 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report