UN to regulate the Internet ?

By Hum
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Hum

Posted
Posted

A U.N.-sponsored conference next month in Dubai will propose new regulations and restrictions for the Internet, which critics say will censor free speech, levy tariffs on e-commerce, and even force companies to clean up their ?e-waste? and make gadgets that are better for the environment.

Concerns about the closed-door event have sparked a Wikileaks-style info-leaking site, and led the State Department on Wednesday to file a series of new proposals or tranches seeking to ensure ?competition and commercial agreements -- and not regulation? as the meeting's main message.

Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. envoy to the conference, says the United States is against sanctions and believes management of the Internet by one central organization goes against free speech.

?[Doing nothing] would not be a terrible outcome at all,? Kramer said recently. ?We need to avoid suffocating the Internet space through well-meaning but overly prescriptive proposals that would seek to control content.?

The conference will be run by the International Telecommunications Union (ITC), a U.N. agency that has typically provided a welcome service by making sure that the Internet works across countries. Many of its guidelines were first instituted in 1988. Most haven?t changed since then.

The World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12) is the first such meeting since those guidelines were created, and businesses are taking it seriously: U.S. delegates will include representatives from AT&T, Cisco, Facebook, GoDaddy, and dozens more.

To dispel concerns, the ITU played damage control in early October.

?There are no proposals submitted to create new international regulatory agencies, or mechanisms, and hence no proposals to put ITU in control of the Internet!? said Malcolm Johnson, ITU's telecommunication standardization bureau director, in a written statement.

more

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1116569-un-to-regulate-the-internet/
Share on other sites
Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
Terry Kramer, the chief U.S. envoy to the conference, says the United States is against sanctions and believes management of the Internet by one central organization goes against free speech.

No, the issue here is not "free speech" but that the US wants to keep control of the internet. The treatment of Wikileaks and Julian Assange perfectly demonstrates the United States' contempt for free speech when it goes against their interests. The legislation talked about here would require companies to clean up their "e-waste" and make equipment that is better for the environment, as well as setting aside investment to develop the internet backbone. Companies shouldn't be allowed to pollute and create inefficient products simply because it's more profitable - there needs to be safeguards in place.

Sadly, it's not surprising to see Fox News spin it as an attempt by the UN to take-over the internet. We know the US supposedly hates regulation - except when it comes to women's reproductive rights and preventing gay people from getting married - but it's not up to the US to dictate internet policy. It needs to be controlled internationally.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

Build their own system and controll it. Enough said ....

You say that as if the US developed the entire infrastructure of the internet. Further, doing so would limit the influence of US companies in Europe. So while your "the US rules the world, suck it!" approach might make you feel better it's not actually in the interests of the US for Europe / the rest of the world to build a separate 'internet'.

Grand Master

+LogicalApex MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Nobody should be in charge of the internet, IMO. It should be free and available for everyone to enjoy..... :blink:....I really have to lay off on the GNU/Linux.... :p

In principal, yes, in practice there has to be someone there to enforce the rules of fairness. We don't need laws and police to protect us from law abiding citizens, but instead to protect us from those who have no respect for the rules of society.

I'm really unsure how we should govern the body to protect the interests of society when it comes to the Internet. Pulling it up to the UN would help to tame the disproportionate control the US levies onto the Internet, but it would also enhance the interests of parties who want to cripple the web even more, such as China and Iran. I would support the control of it being in the hands of the people, but we don't have any precedents for international elections by the citizenry and I'm not sure the average person understands enough about it that they would care to make an informed decision.

Either way, we need a central governing body in the middle; the trick is how to ensure it protects our interests and not those of corporations or governments. Otherwise, we're trading one master, the US with one head, for another, the "International Community" with many heads.

  • theyarecomingforyou and Glassed Silver
  • Like 2
Grand Master

neufuse Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Ah lets just throw logic to the wind...

ah, comon, worked for GPS right?... right?... so when's the E.U.'s Galileo coming online full blown again? eh build your own always works out just great and fast when you do it for fear of someone else controlling it.... right?....

Grand Master

+LogicalApex MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

ah, comon, worked for GPS right?... right?... so when's the E.U.'s Galileo coming online full blown again? eh build your own always works out just great and fast when you do it for fear of someone else controlling it.... right?....

The success of the Internet has been largely due to the standardized nature of it. If you fragment those standards you'll end up harming both sides of the chasm, not helping. To suggest they build their own when doing so would be in the best interest of no one defies logic.

  • theyarecomingforyou and f0rk_b0mb
  • Like 2
Grand Master

f0rk_b0mb

Posted
Posted

In principal, yes, in practice there has to be someone there to enforce the rules of fairness. We don't need laws and police to protect us from law abiding citizens, but instead to protect us from those who have no respect for the rules of society.

I'm really unsure how we should govern the body to protect the interests of society when it comes to the Internet. Pulling it up to the UN would help to tame the disproportionate control the US levies onto the Internet, but it would also enhance the interests of parties who want to cripple the web even more, such as China and Iran. I would support the control of it being in the hands of the people, but we don't have any precidents for international elections by the citizenry and I'm not sure the average person understands enough about it that they would care to make an informed decision.

Either way, we need a central governing body in the middle the trick is how to do ensure it protects our interests and not those of corporations or governments. Otherwise, we're trading one master, the US with one head, for another, the "International Community" with many heads.

This is true. I have no problem with the UN taking down fake sites, sites with malicious intent, and sites that cause harm to children, etc and setting up standards. However, the whole PIPA/ACTA thing is a load. The UN should be very picket and choosey about what they take down and tell us exactly what it violated, or just give them time to take it down themselves.

Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted

While it would be sensible to put the UN in control of the internet - being an international organisation that can balance the needs of all countries - there needs to be safeguards in place to ensure that such power isn't abused. Net neutrality should be enshrined in law, which is something that the US isn't going to support. Even the UN seems unsure of what it intends to do and influential business organisations have made appeals to the UN to oppose net neutrality.

The issue should be how the UN should regulate the internet, not if it should.

  • Spartan Erik
  • Like 1
Grand Master

neufuse Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The success of the Internet has been largely due to the standardized nature of it. If you fragment those standards you'll end up harming both sides of the chasm, not helping. To suggest they build their own when doing so would be in the best interest of no one defies logic.

that was kinda the point on my sarcasim...

Grand Master

HSoft

Posted
Posted

While it would be sensible to put the UN in control of the internet -

No it wouldn't. The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

You just like the idea because you hate America so much.

  • Lord Method Man
  • Like 1
Grand Master

theyarecomingforyou

Posted
Posted
The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

The diplomatic side of the UN is only one aspect of the organisation. Unfortunately it is the highest profile role of the UN and one which is paralysed by the use of vetoes by permanent members of the Security Council - particularly by the US, China and Russia. However, the UN does an incredible amount of very important work and UNESCO is a good example of that (unfortunately the US has dramatically undermined it since Palestine was admitted by a majority vote).

The reason that the US distrusts the UN - despite having huge influence over the organisation, including being home to the United Nations Headquarters - is that the US likes to consider itself above international law and it would rather dictate policy than work to form a consensus with other nations.

No it wouldn't. The UN is a useless organization full of corrupt politicians that never get anything done. Giving the UN control of anything is a bad idea.

Do you honestly believe that the UN is more corrupt than the US Congress? Because approval numbers would suggest the opposite.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Meta is reusing old DDR4 RAM in its servers instead of buying new hardware

      By Nick H. · Posted

      Well, it's good to know that they have found a workaround to a problem that they helped create, I guess...
    • Meta is reusing old DDR4 RAM in its servers instead of buying new hardware

      By Ivan Jenic · Posted

      Meta is reusing old DDR4 RAM in its servers instead of buying new hardware by Ivan Jenic Image: Meta The global hardware shortage isn’t exactly news, as the entire world has been struggling with rising component prices for quite some time now. And while big companies certainly aren’t as affected as the average consumer, even they aren’t opposed to the idea of saving a few (million) bucks. Meta appears to have found a way to spend less on new hardware while also putting its outdated infrastructure to use, essentially killing two birds with one stone. The company has built a custom chip that lets it reuse memory from retired servers rather than buying new hardware. The chip is called Vistara and allows for connecting old DDR4 RAM from obsolete servers into new servers that rely on DDR5. The problem Vistara solves goes back to a basic mismatch in how long hardware lasts. Meta replaces its servers every three to five years, but the memory modules inside them are good for seven to ten. When a server gets decommissioned, perfectly usable DDR4 RAM goes with it. Meta is presenting the new method at today’s ISCA symposium, but The Register has got hold of a paper that explains how Vistara works. It's a custom ASIC that bridges DDR4 memory to newer processors via aCXL 2.0/1.1 interface over PCIe Gen5 x16. Meta pulls DDR4 sticks from old machines and installs them in dedicated units it calls MemServers, each of which pairs 768GB of DDR5 with 256GB of recovered DDR4. The operating system sees the DDR4 as an additional memory node and draws from it when the primary DDR5 is running low. Off-the-shelf CXL hardware couldn't do this, so Meta built its own. Existing interfaces bundle their own memory with the controller, which makes reusing old RAM sticks impossible. But Vistara separates the controller from the memory entirely, so Meta can plug in whatever DDR4 sticks it has on hand. Meta plans to deploy the new architecture in hyperscale infrastructure with millions of servers, which should mean that Meta’s AI datacenters will now be more efficient. The company is investing heavily in AI infrastructure, especially with its new AI model, Muse Spark, now widely available. All of this doesn't mean that Meta will exclusively rely on "recycled" RAM, but the company is still looking at considerable savings at scale.
    • Save up to 87% on ChatPlayground AI lifetime subscriptions

      By News Staff · Posted

      Save up to 87% on ChatPlayground AI lifetime subscriptions by Steven Parker Today's highlighted deal comes via our Apps + Software section of the Neowin Deals store, where for only a limited time, you can save up to 87% on ChatPlayground AI: lifetime subscriptions. ChatPlayground AI puts the world’s top AI models in one powerful interface, letting you enter a single prompt and instantly compare outputs from multiple models to choose the perfect response for your needs. Boost productivity and creativity with access to the latest AI giants like GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 1.5 Flash, DeepSeek V3, and dozens more — all in one window. Whether you’re chatting, coding, generating images, or refining prompts, ChatPlayground AI equips you with advanced tools like prompt engineering, image/PDF chat, saved conversations, and AI image creation, plus priority support to keep your workflow seamless. Access the world’s best AI models Side-by-Side Comparisons: Enter one prompt & instantly view results from multiple AI models to find the best output for your needs 40+ AI Models: Includes GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 1.5 Flash, DeepSeek V3, Llama, Perplexity, and many more Multi-Function Platform: Access AI for chat, image generation & coding all within a single interface Web Browser Extension: Offers a Chrome extension to seamlessly integrate the platform into your browsing workflow Boost productivity with powerful features ChatPlayground Interface: Designed for seamless AI model comparison in one window Prompt Engineering: Refine & optimize your prompts for better, more accurate responses Chat with Images & PDFs: Upload visuals and documents to get context-aware answers Saved Chat History: Keep track of past conversations for reference & ongoing projects AI Image Generation: Create high-quality visuals powered by top AI image models Priority Customer Support: Get faster assistance whenever you need it What you'll get with the Unlimited Plan Includes unlimited messages/month Built for prompt engineers, startups, and teams who run experiments nonstop Includes priority access to new features and future models Good to know Length of access: lifetime Redemption deadline: redeem your code within 30 days of purchase Access options: Desktop Max number of device(s): Unlimited Available to both NEW & Existing users Updates included A lifetime subscription to ChatPlayground AI (Unlimited Plan) normally costs $619, but you can pick it up for just $79 for a limited time - that represents a saving of $530 (87% off). Click the link below for more details, always check terms and specifications before making a purchase. Get this ChatPlayground AI (Unlimited) for $79 (was $619) There are also two other discounted plans to choose from. Although priced in U.S. dollars, this deal is available for digital purchase worldwide. Support queries If you have queries or need support for any of the Neowin Deals, please use the contact form here. Neowin Deals are managed and sold by StackCommerce who represent Neowin on an affiliate basis. Why we post these deals We post these because we earn commission on each sale so as not to rely solely on advertising, which many of our readers block. It all helps toward paying staff reporters, servers and hosting costs. So for those that keep moaning and complaining, be thankful we're still online for you to even do that. Other ways to support Neowin Whitelist Neowin by not blocking our ads Create a free member account to see fewer ads Make a donation to support our day to day running costs Subscribe to Neowin - for $14 a year, or $28 a year for an ad-free experience Disclosure: Neowin benefits from revenue of each sale made through our branded deals site powered by StackCommerce.
    • Sihoo Doro C300 Pro V2 Ergonomic Office Chair review: The Ikea of chairs

      By Steven P. · Posted

      Not on my Aeron Remastered no.
    • Tidal won't monetize AI slop music, company says

      By Steven P. · Posted

      I like Tidal, but it still does not control devices from the mobile/app and still no surround support. And yeah re: above comment I still get a lot of network errors and I am on a 4/4 Gbit Fiber connection.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      539
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!