Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Oct 2016 00:50 UTC, submitted by dionicio
Internet & Networking

On Saturday, the U.S. government plans to cede control of some of the internet's core systems - namely, the directories that help web browsers and apps know where to find the latest weather, maps and Facebook musings.

The U.S. has been in charge of these systems for more than three decades; plans to transfer control of these functions to a nonprofit oversight organization have been in the works since the late 1990s. Some Republicans in Congress raised late objections over the transfer, which they termed a "giveaway" to the rest of the world. But they failed to block the move in a spending bill to keep the government operating.

Here's a look at the systems in question and what's at stake for internet users.

Thread beginning with comment 635091
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Mistake
by codewrangler on Tue 4th Oct 2016 14:27 UTC
codewrangler
Member since:
2010-01-28

This is a HUGE mistake....

Reply Score: -1

RE: Mistake
by cpuobsessed on Tue 4th Oct 2016 14:53 in reply to "Mistake"
cpuobsessed Member since:
2009-06-09

Did you read the article? Nothing changes

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Mistake
by ThomasFuhringer on Wed 5th Oct 2016 08:24 in reply to "RE: Mistake"
ThomasFuhringer Member since:
2007-01-25

Actually it is a mistake and the article does not fully capture the implications. "The government is ceding control." - sounds good. But TO WHOM? Some further research shows that we will se a "governance model defined by the inclusion of all voices, including business, academics, technical experts, civil society..." Again, sounds great. But the truth is those parties are not democratically elected! The government is and can be voted out. The ICANN crowd might develop a life of its own, get highjacked by some special interest group one day down the line, as so often happens with "self governing bodies". And then there will be no means to control them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Mistake
by mmrezaie on Tue 4th Oct 2016 15:17 in reply to "Mistake"
mmrezaie Member since:
2006-05-09

The title of news articles makes it so, but if you read more into it then you will see there were many points why this makes sense, and also it won't be much different compared to what already is. I am not sure even in the future they (domain naming mechanisms) will be that much relevant anyway, but thats a hunch.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Mistake
by Alfman on Tue 4th Oct 2016 15:46 in reply to "Mistake"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

codewrangler,

This has been debated in the US and there were politicians who tried to stop it, and they've actually succeeded in delaying it before, but they didn't have enough votes to stop it permanently.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/icann-stewardship-transfer-looms-amid-...


Incidentally: This article does a terrible job in educating readers. Anyone who didn't already have a vague idea of what this was about would still be wholly uninformed and not have any clue of the events leading up to it.

This link has more substance even though it's dated:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/04/the-proposed-trans...

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Mistake
by project_2501 on Tue 4th Oct 2016 16:02 in reply to "Mistake"
project_2501 Member since:
2006-03-20

why is this a HUGE mistake?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Mistake
by pooo on Tue 4th Oct 2016 16:45 in reply to "RE: Mistake"
pooo Member since:
2006-04-22

I think this is sarcastic reference to Trump and his whining about this switch.

Reply Parent Score: 2