- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 41,582
- Reaction score
- 31,198
- Location
- Southern England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Because the US currently is able to shut down access to a German website being accessed by a German citizen located in Germany when said German citizen is breaking no German law.
This annoys other countries. Many of those countries are our allies and trading partners.
Additionally, the international nature of the internet means that businesses are currently forced to abide by hundreds of differing sets of regulations. Business would benefit from having a more unified regulatory environment.
The UN does not want to take control of the Internet... most countries want the US to loose control because of its abuse of the system time and time again. The obvious place to put such control is the UN, most likely in an organisation under the UN... like UNESCO and WHO and WTO.
From the OP....
So, while you think this is all ado about not much, have you read this part? and why would you ignore such a possibility? Clearly you like the internet, and use it....But is it just the ideological mind that is blinded equally where you claim we see UN=bad, you in turn see UN=all good.....So just what the hell are you arguing here?
How does one "abuse" the internet? I don't believe the internet is something that can be abused.
Also, the UN believes they have the authority to control everything. If it was up to the UN we would have a one world government with a single Marxist "dear leader."
The UN is about as evil of an entity one could think up in an alleged "free world."
How does one "abuse" the internet? I don't believe the internet is something that can be abused.
Also, the UN believes they have the authority to control everything.
If it was up to the UN we would have a one world government with a single Marxist "dear leader."
The UN is about as evil of an entity one could think up in an alleged "free world."
Easy. When a single country can seize a .Com domain because that webpage breaks the law in the US then you have abuse. That the page is for people in another country where the content is legal seems to be irrelevant for the US. That is abuse.
Er no, American right wing fanatics believe this... it is far far from reality.
Wait the black helicopters will come and take you, get your tinfoil hat on so they cant track you!
Yea they are so evil those organisations like WHO, WTO, UNESCO, UNICEF and so on... helping people those evil entities....
Shutting off access to a German website from a German citizen who lives in Germany who is breaking no German laws would be considered abuse by any reasonable standard.
Your perception of the UN's goals is outright ridiculous. Or are you suggesting that China, Russia, Iran, and France are all trying to submit themselves to the same singular leadership? :lamo
Do you realize how insanely absurd your argument is?
People who buy dominion names abuse the internet?
So basically what you're saying is that I shouldn't have the right to buy a dominion name as a private citizen of the US, not only that but you're arguing this point on a .com which was purchased by a private citizen (er abuser of the internet)... Oh and to make your argument even more absurd you have 15,541 posts and have been a member since 2006 on a private .com site.
Right now you're like Che "Ernesto" Guevara "Lynch" shopping at Walmart with every post you make on www.debatepolitics.COM
Oh it is?
That is not what I said. And it also clearly shows you dont know how domain names are given out and how big an influence the US has.
No that is not what I am saying, that is what you are saying.
I am saying, that lets say a British company buys a .com domain and starts to do its business in the UK and that business is fully legal there. However in the US it is not, and hence the feds can (and have) seized said domain because the content breaks US law... but as I said not UK law, which is the intended target.
And you are just ignoring what I am writing and making stuff up.
I can't speak for China and Iran but as far as Russia goes, this statement is simply not true. I have spent a lot of time in St. Petersburg over the past three years and I can tell you first hand that access is not limited. I never had any difficulty viewing any news site, facebook, message board, e-mail, etc... In fact, I actually thought things were "loser" there than they are here. I could actually watch live NFL games for FREE!No websites should be shutdown. The Germans have never changed - they're still fascists, just in a different sense.
China, Russia and Iran highly censor their "internet." They're on totally different servers. The average internet user in the US doesn't have access to their servers. At one point there was an access point via google but that no longer exists, however it is against the law in China, Russia, Iran etc for their citizens to tap into our servers and be exposed to what we're exposed to everyday online.
I can't speak for China and Iran but as far as Russia goes, this statement is simply not true. I have spent a lot of time in St. Petersburg over the past three years and I can tell you first hand that access is not limited. I never had any difficulty viewing any news site, facebook, message board, e-mail, etc... In fact, I actually thought things were "loser" there than they are here. I could actually watch live NFL games for FREE!
Pretty cool, if you ask me.
Maybe he meant North Korea.
They really don't have internet in North Korea... The elitists do but other than that - no go.
I wouldn't call what North Korea has as "internet" it is more like a segregated network.
I want to get into their servers....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?