>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]:    Non-member submission from [[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ronda 
>Hauben)]   
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:37:50 -0400 (EDT)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  Tue Jul 25 11:37:49 2000
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from umcc.ais.org (w197.z208176209.det-mi.dsl.cnc.net [208.176.209.197])
>       by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F018F018
>       for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:37:47 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: by umcc.ais.org
>       via send-mail with stdio
>       id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>       for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:37:41 -0400 (EDT)
>       (Smail-3.2.0.93 1997-Apr-12 #3 built 1997-Apr-19)
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:37:41 -0400 (EDT)
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ronda Hauben)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: pfir response
>
>response sent to nettime and to PFIR on their statement
>
>>From ronda Mon Jul 24 10:58:39 2000
>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:58:28 -0400 (EDT)
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ronda Hauben)
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: <nettime> PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Bcc:
>
>
>
>>          PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control
>
>Where is there a way to focus and welcome discussion on any of this?
>
>It is good to see the recognition that ICANN is an anti-model for
>Internet governance.
>
>But in order to not just end up with a next generation ICANN it
>is important to sort out the problems that ICANN represents,
>and the principles needed to protect the vital functions of the 
>Internet infrastructure from "vested interests"
>
>>It is increasingly clear that the Internet, as embodied by the World Wide
>>Web and a wide variety of other Net-based services and technologies is
>>rapidly becoming a critical underpinning and foundation to virtually every
>>aspect of our lives, from the very fundamental to the exceedingly mundane.
>
>The Internet is *not* embodied by the World Wide Web but is a general
>purpose interactive human computer communications system.
>
>This is crucial to keep in mind and to rocognize. 
>
>The efforts to deny the general purpose nature of the Internet
>and the interactive nature of the Internet is at some of the 
>basis of the problem with the conception of ICANN which has
>been created to protect certain  very narrow vested interests.
>
>>It is likely that few aspects of commerce, education, communications,
>>government, entertainment, or any other facets of our daily existence will
>>be unaffected by this exceedingly rapid change that is sweeping the globe
>>far more rapidly than would have been anticipated only a few years ago.
>
>Somehow this is secondary. 
>
>The point is that the Internet is a unique new system and one 
>that needs to be understood as something new, not as only an 
>improvement of something old.
>
>
>>These global and interconnected developments, unprecedented in human
>>history, suggest that decisions regarding policies, regulation, control, and
>>related Internet activities will be of crucial concern to the *entire*
>>world's population.  Consequently, the proper representation of many varied
>>interests regarding such activities must be respected.
>
>Good to see the acknowledgment that the "entire" world's population
>has an interest in the future of the Internet. But then one can't
>go and try to talk about "proper representation".
>
>The issue, instead, which a 1997 U.S. government report pointed out
>is that there is a public interest involved.
>
>This is different from representing different vested interests in
>a so called "proper representation" way.
>
>To determine how to fulfill the public interest one must go outside
>of those with a vested interest.
>
>
>So there is a need to determine how to serve the "public interest" 
>and to contain and protect against the "vested interests".
>
>Unfortunately the proposal you put forward still includes the 
>"vested interests" only it enlarges the circle of these.
>
>I want to recommend that Lauren and Peter and others interested
>in the problem of how to provide the needed institutional form
>to protect the vital functions of the Internet's infrastructure
>look at the proposal I submitted to Ira Magaziner at his request
>and then to the U.S. Department of Commerce before they even
>had the ICANN proposal. 
>
>My proposal is up at the NTIA web site and also at both of 
>my web sites. It is called "The Internet an International Public
>Treasure" and it is online at
>http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/dns_proposal.txt
>
>It is also online at http://www.ais.org/~ronda
>
>I identify the problem that has to be solved, whereas I don't
>feel the PFIR statement does. And that problem is how to protect
>the vital functions of the Internet from the vested interests.
>
>How to have these vital functions adminstered in a way that 
>will serve the long term interests of the Internet and its
>users around the world, all of them.
>
>To do this there has to be a way to protect those doing the adminstration
>from the vested interests who have narrow self interests they are 
>trying to serve.
>
>It won't help to put all of the vested interests into an organization
>and give them representative rights. The problem to be solved is
>how to protect the organization from them, not how to give them 
>the ability to exerciese their power.
>
>Also my proposal describes how to do this, and the way is in line
>with the way that the Internet was born and reared. And that
>is to create a working prototype based on the needs and to have
>it function in the most open way possible and online as much 
>as possible. And then to see if that prototype does what is
>needed, and if so to build on it. And if not, to learn from the 
>experience, to build a new and better prototype.
>
>
>Also my proposal is that computer scientists supported by their
>governments be the people who build this prototype, not business
>people or others who don't have a way to understand the nature
>of the technology and science that has made it possible to create
>the Internet and to have it spread around the world.
>
>It would be good to see some means of discussing my original proposal
>to the Dept of Commerce, as part of any broader discussion that
>goes on about what is needed to protect the vital functions of 
>the Internet's infrastructure.
>
>I welcome comments and discussion on my proposal "The Internet
>An International Public Treasure" and invite 
>people to disseminate it or to help find a means to give it the 
>needed public discussion and exploration it should have.
>
>Cheers
>
>Ronda
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>http://www.ais.org/~ronda
>
>
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                               http://ph-1.613.473.1719  
It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR



Reply via email to