Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
China Government The Internet

ICANN's Ex CEO Fronts Chinese Initiative On Running the Internet ( 55

Earthquake Retrofit points out this story at the Register which discusses what could be some big changes for the future of the internet. "On the last day of the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen, the conference organizers unexpectedly announced they had set up a new 'high-level advisory committee' that would guide the agenda of future conferences and 'contribute ideas for the development of the Internet.' The committee has already had its first meeting, the organizers stated, naming ICANN's Fadi Chehade and Alibaba CEO Jack Ma as its founders and noting that it had 'invited 31 leading Internet figures from governments, enterprises, academic institutions, and technological communities to be members of the first high-level advisory committee.' Those 'figures' have not been named but we understand they include government representatives from a number of authoritarian governments, including Russia, and do not include lead names from the internet community."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ICANN's Ex CEO Fronts Chinese Initiative On Running the Internet

Comments Filter:
  • by tlambert ( 566799 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:16PM (#51154851)

    If Paul Vixie and Vint Cerf weren't there... I pass.

  • And so it ends. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rbmorse ( 833877 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:17PM (#51154861)
    But it was a good run while it lasted.
    • The Chinese Internet has been essentially separate from the other one for some time now. At least in that Chinese users rarely access foreign web services, foreign users barely access Chinese web services and the latency and reliability is punitive if they try. Problem is, the Chinese Internet is not just insular, it's also a bit of a mess internally. Granted
  • by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:18PM (#51154865)
    ... I have to wonder why it took so long for something like this to occur.

    Governments are accustomed to taking control of things. Authoritative governments even more so.

    The Internet is now in a proxy war for ownership according to the "land-grab" rules of authoritative regimes --- if you can grab it, it is yours.

    • by sumdumass ( 711423 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:23PM (#51154879) Journal

      This is change you can believe in..

      It's only possible because the US gave it up.

      • This is change you can believe in..

        It's only possible because the US gave it up.

        The rest of the world (billions of people) don't trust the United States to be neutral with managing domains, etc. etc. The USA has a habit of allowing corporations to take over what is a state or federal responsibility. (Example, For profit institutions in healthcare, internet, prisons, food inspection, etc.)

  • by Ecuador ( 740021 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:20PM (#51154867) Homepage

    I am wondering what the elders of the internet think about all this. First of all what do the Chinese have to do with the internet, when they are so far from the Big Ben?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Jack Ma built a "successful" business on top of thievery, so why not target the Internet next?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    They're right from the Victorian era... it looks like I'm hearing the members of the Reform Club.

    But we need a Phileas Fogg, who believes in a world out there -- just like many great Americans did, BTW, only the mediocre thinks "America über alles" -- to travel abroad, to make the impossible happen, to save a non-white beauty -- and marry her!

    Sometimes even I think I'm hoping for too much...

    Anyway, you think China is wanting too much? I think the Internet is a kind of World Heritage and should be manag

    • by Anonymous Coward

      No I do NOT think that authoritarian governments like China or Russia OR the UN will properly manage the internet and will clamp down on any and all speech so the "world status quo" (that is, the government leaders in power) will be retained.

      Sure, the US hasn't exactly been a bastion of free speech these past several years either but it's a damn sight better than Russia or China.

      And you fail in your lack of understanding as to why this might be a BAD thing.

    • by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @04:47PM (#51155233)

      Who the internet 'should' be managed by doesn't matter, because the internet is composed of hardware, and the hardware exists within the jurisdiction of various countries. The UN can say whatever they want - but if some country passes a law mandating censorship, and has the power to compel equipment operators to comply under threat of criminal prosecution, then censorship will occur within the borders of that country.

  • it's inevitable! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 20, 2015 @03:45PM (#51154963)

    Here's the thing. There are three forces conspiring to centralize control of the internet:

    (1) Major governments, who don't like that anyone could say anything on it.
    (2) Major corporations.
    (3) The general public, who has been complicit in moving all their communications away from decentralized, open, and uncensored protocols onto proprietary, centralized, and censored ones.

    Arrayed against that are a motley crew of mostly old timers who remember what the net was like when it was free and open. But those people are dying off, giving up, or just plain deciding the fight isn't worth it when most people are working against them by using FB and the like.

    This is a fight that can only be lost. It might be different if the general public would stand up and act against centralization of control, but they do just the opposite. They prefer Facebook to email. Closed IM services to open ones where anyone can run a node.

    What was once the freest global means of communication ever invented by humans, something that might have given freedom to the world, will become the most Orwellian. Oh, it'll all be fine if you want Facebook-style control of everything you do, see, say, and read on your locked down tablet. That kind of "freedom" will never be taken away.

    It's already under way. Another 25 years and we should be almost all the way there, with the people who want a free internet shoved to the fringes when nothing works for them any more.

    • Even email is becoming centralized. Try running your own mail server and see how easy it is for your outgoing emails to be treated as SPAM -- which is pretty much the same as not being accepted.
      • by ls671 ( 1122017 )

        You just need a static IP that wasn't sending spam before you got it. If it was, you can send notices to black list administrators to make them take you off their list faster but it will eventually get off by itself if it stops sending spam..

        I have never got my emails blocked for spam except once where I got my hands on one IP that had previously sent spam so I just re-routed the outgoing mails through a different IP until it got unlisted.

        Residential dynamic dsl/modem-cable/dhcp pool addresses are often blo

        • You just need a static IP that wasn't sending spam before you got it. If it was, you can send notices to black list administrators to make them take you off their list faster but it will eventually get off by itself if it stops sending spam..

          I have a static IP address. The IP address is not listed in any reputable block lists. I have been using (and not spamming from) this IP address for about 18 months. My ISP (I am sending from a VPS in a datacenter) runs a transparent proxy for outgoing smtp traffic,

      • Oh I think you're being a little alarmist here, or maybe your mail server isn't properly secured/configured and you're not on a static IP? I've had a mail server running on a VPS server in the US for years and it's doing just fine.

    • Inevitable? Perhaps. I'm not too worried. Freedom has always found a way and will continue to do so in the future; and it will also find a natural balance with the need for a stable, functioning society - we don't really need the internet for that, it's just a convenient tool.

      As for the internet, I tend to think of it in terms of cost vs benefit; there are some clear and very important benefits: it enables fast, global communication, which helps break down barriers and open up our minds. It gives us access

  • Is that the ex-CEO of ICANN was likely less corrupt than the current goons running the show. Imagine what would happen if they had their say...
  • In other news (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @04:16PM (#51155061)
    We have a global ruling class who forms powerful international organizations to protect their interests. Who knew? Can we working class shlubs _please_ stop fighting among ourselves long enough to notice?
    • by Anonymous Coward

      I heard some working class shlubs did that recently. I think they called their movement the Arab spring. It isn't working out too well for them.

    • by MikeKD ( 549924 )
      Nope [].
    • We have a global ruling class who forms powerful international organizations to protect their interests. Who knew? Can we working class shlubs _please_ stop fighting among ourselves long enough to notice?

      Interesting that you say this. My pet theory on why the media has been trying their level best to stir the racism pot is to keep everyone divided. Articles that announce breathlessly that a white cop shot a black person and have little to no other facts besides that. "White privilege" rants that only do a superb job of driving people apart. The more people are separated and at each others throats the less they will notice important macro trends events like the middle class eroding or revolt level inequa

      • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday December 20, 2015 @10:02PM (#51156493)
        you hit nail on head. It's not so much about racism as it is about having an underclass to look down on. I remember finding this out in a college history course. Slavery was important to the south because poor white southerners were kept in check by comparing their living conditions to black slaves. It's something every culture does: People don't measure your quality of life objectively. For most people it's subjective. This is also why India has a cast system and Britain a Class system. I'm sure I could find other examples without too much effort.

        It's not some grand conspiracy per se, it's just that if you're a member of the 1% you need strategies to control the other 99%. This is one of the most effective. If a ruling class didn't come up with stuff like this it doesn't stay a ruling class for very long. Survival bias sets in and you start seeing the same patterns emerging. It's all pretty well known to Historians but it's not as cool or sexy as talking about wars so you're lucky if you get a paragraph devoted to it. Plus these days talking about it gets you shouted down as a politically correct feminazi or some such. Another thing the ruling class is good at is recognizing threats...
  • on what basis are some "authoritarian governments"? on the basis of propaganda coming from western governments that self style themselves as 'liberal democratic"?
    in fact, in past and now, their actual actions show western governments are same(if not worse) in terms of unjust use of authority as any other government that exist at present. at present, in terms of their actions, in the past british empire and usa were much worse than present day china, and currently there is no significant difference between

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Sounds like someone's buying into radical left wing propaganda.. the kind that encourages self-loathing of individual freedom and rights in western peoples. You are comparing past governments with today's. Try doing so on like terms at least. As un-free as the US is becoming, it's still better here than it is in china.

    • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

      Well, for one, ex-pat critics of Russia have a nasty habit of dying from polonium poisoning. Also, oligarchs who speak out against the government tend to be thrown in jail and have all of their assets permanently seized. The oligarchs who back the regime tend to be left alone.

    • "currently there is no significant difference between russia or usa" -- yeah, that's why all the refugees and economic migrants are beating down the border gates to get in to Russia. It's called "voting with your feet".

  • That if they F*** up the Internet we'll just build another one.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    They start out with flowery talk of peace, love, and justice.... then they staff-up with amoral globalist idealists who immediately proclaim that everyone from everywhere should have equal involvement..... but this means evil tyrants get power because most nations on Earth are led by supremely distasteful people with a penchant for murder, deceit, and theft. This is how the UN puts nations like Saudi Arabia and Iran in charge of Human Rights.

    Once the Progressive Mr Obama got his hands on the net, it was ine

  • If the Chinese want to dictate how the worldwide Internet should be ran, they can go pound sand.

"Unibus timeout fatal trap program lost sorry" - An error message printed by DEC's RSTS operating system for the PDP-11