Should The United States Give up control of the Internet?

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: sandorski
re: the US invented it, so they should keep it.

That is a silly arguement. If that was the standard, only Britain could make electronic computers, only France(IIRC) could make automobiles, [insert invention and country here] could make those things.

That analogy doesn't work. It would be more like 'only Britain could own that specific electronic computer', which is what you would expect.

If the US bought it (aka invested the money in building the infrastructure) then they own it.

Agreed.

 

[CanOWorms]

No. I'm afraid of what would happen if the UN, EU, China, etc. have control over the Internet. They should just make their own version instead of trying to steal it. Typical.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

There is about the same freedom of speech in both areas, that is: almost total freedom of speech.

Some differences:

In the EU you get far more freedom in the erotic-involved things. Some movies have been cut so much in the US that they were 50 minutes long. Some of them are never published in the US because they would be rated for-18-or-older and badly cut. Almost all of them were censored because of explicit sex.
In some european countries (Italy, Germany) you are not allowed to write anything praising the totalitarian regimes ruling before World War II.
There are also a couple of rules about things considered an invitation to racial hate. You can write them, but you then are likely to face trial.

In a word: exactly what you would expect given the difference in the history of the two areas. The US are more concerned about sex, given the puritanism that's always been part of their history, Europe is more scared of racial and political hate, given the couple of nasty world wars that emerged on the continent because of nationalism or racial suprematism.

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
You are dreaming.

The "lack of restrictions" you speak of is a purely a "lack of enforcement". Kinda like some of the Southern U.S. states where oral sex is forbidden, or the woman can't be on top of the man. The fact is, these laws exist, and unfortunately they don't become null and void because nobody respects them (or a large number of the population, anyway.) They can and will be used against you if "someone" decides so. Sadly, I can still report you to the MPAA for having and using DVDDecrypter, AnyDVD and DVD Shrink... and they CAN, presumably, urge authorities to fine or jail you. 321 Studios, with their DVDxCopy were closed down not too long ago. All the software that allows for the bypass of such copy encryption remains illegal and can be onbly hosted outside U.S. servers. Or how about the Russian guy arrested in the U.S for bypassing the PDF encryptions? How about university professors not being able to publish works which dissect copy encryption procedures? These are not THAT old.

And no, SO FAR there haven't been any attempts by the U.S. authorities to "censor content on the www" per se. But it's more insidious than that. I remember a group of VERY powerful U.S. lawyers trying to COMPLETELY curtail the sale of wine over the internet - all over the world, presumably - because they were worried that underage children in the U.S. might order some wine and have it delivered to their family home, where they could imbibe happily. That was in 1999. A failure, yes, but the danger always remains, and if the U.S. fights to keep control of the Web, it's not for altruistic reasons - with your country's steady decline into religious paranoia, ugly things can be lurking ahead. Fat lot of good will it do you that you can say whatever you want on the internet ("free expression", yes?) - if you can't do anything.

And if the internet is such a free & unregulated place, without danger stemming from the part of the government (ANY government), why did people with more foresight and backbone that anyone on this board create the EFF ?

Sure, the DVD decryption law is a stink bomb. But it wouldn't be any different if control of the interent were under any other organizations control. Lobbying will take place no matter who is the governing body. period. In the US we've done a good job of keeping the web free. And the simple undeniable truth which you like to ignore is we built the infrastrucutre. Its ours. It is not in our best interest to just give it away, just like it is not in our best interest to just give the infrastructure to GPS away. If you want it, then next time you build it.

And no, SO FAR there haven't been any attempts by the U.S. authorities to "censor content on the www" per se. But it's more insidious than that. I remember a group of VERY powerful U.S. lawyers trying to COMPLETELY curtail the sale of wine over the internet - all over the world, presumably - because they were worried that underage children in the U.S. might order some wine and have it delivered to their family home, where they could imbibe happily. That was in 1999. A failure, yes, but the danger always remains, and if the U.S. fights to keep control of the Web, it's not for altruistic reasons - with your country's steady decline into religious paranoia, ugly things can be lurking ahead. Fat lot of good will it do you that you can say whatever you want on the internet ("free expression", yes?) - if you can't do anything.

So your prime example of restricting freedoms is a case where they failed to do so? I asked for examples where we curtailed freedoms to members of other countries through the web. You've failed to provide even one example.

Again, threats always exist, but that's why we live in a democracy. So we can hold our leaders accountable.

And I'd have to say your ranting is proof that "paranoia" is not restricted to the religious of my country. You've listed one copyright law you dissapprove of (that doesn't affect you) and a failed restriction of selling wine (again didn't affect you) and decided that we are as a result not free to do anything. What a nut case.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

That's only over the main network stations. You can basically say or do anything on 'tv'.

And yes, I'm definitely sure. There is more freedom in speech, political parties, and in mediums such as books and movies in the US than in Europe in general.

 

[piasabird]

I have this one book I read about the Internet. The US did not develop the Internet totally alone in Isolation. The US and Other countries were both making networks of their own. We took some things from really smart foreigners. Some people from Britian and other western European countries. The Bill Gates hired some really smart guys from places like Yugoslavia and Windows was born.

2 Books that you can read that might open your mind a bit are:

One is Accidental Empires, by Robert X Cringely, Harpers Business

Another one that I really liked is about the Internet Specifically is called:
Where Wizards Stay Up Late-The Origins of the Internet, Katie Hafner & Matthew Lyon, A touchstone book, Simon and Schuster, New York.

In the Second Book they talk about what it took to actually put the Internet together and make it work. This book goes all the way back to computers with Iron Cores wrapped with copper wire. Engineers worked on things that had to be so steamlined because computers had so little memory that programmers had to know how to mix up both hardware and the absolute best programming to streamline the code to make it work as fast as possible. This started in the days of Eisenhower.

Donald Davies a British Programmer invented Packet-Switching and at the same time Paul Baran, in the US was working on the same technology. Baran Worked for Rand. AT&T Said Baran's Idea would never work. We have been fighting with the Phone Company since the beginning.

 

[Screech]

There's a really simple argument for keeping it as it is: Don't fix something that's not broken......

 

[CHfan4ever]

LET THE KOREAN GIRLZ OWN THE INTRANET@@@@2@!!@#"d

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hate speech laws? "Politically correct" is codified into law over there.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: tss4

[...] You've listed one copyright law you dissapprove of (that doesn't affect you) and a failed restriction of selling wine (again didn't affect you) and decided that we are as a result not free to do anything. What a nut case.

Well, name-calling won't help your aegument, and neither will misreading my post. I didn't say that you're not free to do anything NOW. I'm saying you might not enjoy this privilege forever. I also mentioned EFF, which you conveniently overlooked... how pitiful.

But whatever, if I'm a "nut case" for you, you are an idiot in my eyes. Case closed.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hate speech laws? "Politically correct" is codified into law over there.

The only thing you can't say is directly rascist things. So if i was a publically known character, it only grabs them, and i say black people are generically stupid, i might get a fine.
Other than that, there's nothing really you can't say.
Lately it's been used to shut down a local radio station, that was co-run by some guy who was a right-wing freak.
He could only use it one day a week as it was a shared radio station.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

That's only over the main network stations. You can basically say or do anything on 'tv'.

And yes, I'm definitely sure. There is more freedom in speech, political parties, and in mediums such as books and movies in the US than in Europe in general.

I don't se why there's more freedom of speech, when there's nothing really you can't say, apart from my above post.
That they're not using it is quite another thing!

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: tss4

[...] You've listed one copyright law you dissapprove of (that doesn't affect you) and a failed restriction of selling wine (again didn't affect you) and decided that we are as a result not free to do anything. What a nut case.

Well, name-calling won't help your aegument, and neither will misreading my post. I didn't say that you're not free to do anything NOW. I'm saying you might not enjoy this privilege forever. I also mentioned EFF, which you conveniently overlooked... how pitiful.

But whatever, if I'm a "nut case" for you, you are an idiot in my eyes. Case closed.

OK nut case, was a bit over the top, but your really starting to sound like one with all your paranoia.

And how exactly is EFF limiting your freedoms on the internet? Nope, you've done nothing but sound paranoid and refer to the threat of censorship... a threat that would still be there no matter who or what controlled the net. The point was I asked you for some examples where your freedoms on the internet were being denied and you couldn't come up with one. All you could come up with was the US censoring its own people and a failed attempt at import restrictions over the net (again targeted at its own people). So until you can point an example of the US actively censoring people from other countries over the internet, your paranoia can't be taken serious.

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

That's only over the main network stations. You can basically say or do anything on 'tv'.

And yes, I'm definitely sure. There is more freedom in speech, political parties, and in mediums such as books and movies in the US than in Europe in general.

I don't se why there's more freedom of speech, when there's nothing really you can't say, apart from my above post.
That they're not using it is quite another thing!

You must not be watching the same US TV, that we are. The TV is used for an outlet to just about every political and social view in America.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I don't think we should for only one reason. I don't want my first amendment rights overridden by a foreign country who doesn't believe in freedom of speech.

I agree. I don't want the EU with their more limited freedom of speech to influence the Internet.

What? Where does the idea that europe has limited freedom of speech come from? If anything, we've got mroe freedom of speech than you.

Hardly. There are far more restrictions in Europe than in the US in regards to free speech.

Are you sure? If anything you're more inhibited in what you say! Especially on tv.

That's only over the main network stations. You can basically say or do anything on 'tv'.

And yes, I'm definitely sure. There is more freedom in speech, political parties, and in mediums such as books and movies in the US than in Europe in general.

I don't se why there's more freedom of speech, when there's nothing really you can't say, apart from my above post.
That they're not using it is quite another thing!

And that is already a restriction on the freedom of speech that some governments also overstep in some cases. In addition, there are other restrictions on books and movies and the such.

The Internet should not be restricted in its content, even if that content is wrong.

 

[Taggart]

No, because the US is the best nation in the world, the rest of the world can't handle the responsibility. We get all the goodies.

 

[Engineer]

Doesn't matter. It will be outsourced/offshored soon enough.