3 ms·

Thanks for the kid-gloves reply :) I hadn't considered that there isn't really a central authority for controlling who runs a peer, aside from ICANN, but they

Thanks for the kid-gloves reply :) I hadn't considered that there isn't really a central authority for controlling who runs a peer, aside from ICANN, but they have pretty loose reins. Funny that everyone waxes poetic about bitcoin being a revolution in anonymous and tacit network management. Meanwhile our little Internet experiment continues to be a HUGE tacit agreement to adhere to a handful of network protocols.

jsmthrowaway 11y ago
If you talk to ICANN, IANA, and friends, they're very clear (and careful to reiterate, even in minor threads) that all they do is run databases that contain interesting information. All of their policy revolves around admission to and management of said databases. It's comforting to think of authorities that govern the Internet, particularly when one of those organizations even has "Authority" in the name, but the truth is that the Internet is a miracle of decentralization as you say; we as network operators on the Internet give the databases meaning and force, not ICANN or any of its subordinates. ICANN has power because we have chosen their databases as the root of said power. Even the fact that 'news.ycombinator.com' leads here is a de facto consensus since the Internet could, theoretically, switch roots tomorrow and completely invalidate every domain name. It won't happen, much to the chagrin of alt-root operators from the 90s and 2000s and contemporary attempts like NameCoin[0], but it can, and there is absolutely nothing ICANN could do about it. They charge admission to a well-maintained database that underpins this whole show, and that's pretty much the entirety of what they do. It's on all of us to tend to the best interests of the Internet, and way too many people with access forget that. However, with responsibility like that also comes opportunity: once you realize that it's basically all of our good faith and de facto consensus holding this thing together, the barrier to entry for you to get involved with the Internet is suddenly far lower. [0]: Oh yes, it's been tried, a lot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root

jsmthrowaway 11y ago

If you talk to ICANN, IANA, and friends, they're very clear (and careful to reiterate, even in minor threads) that all they do is run databases that contain interesting information. All of their policy revolves around admission to and management of said databases. It's comforting to think of authorities that govern the Internet, particularly when one of those organizations even has "Authority" in the name, but the truth is that the Internet is a miracle of decentralization as you say; we as network operators on the Internet give the databases meaning and force, not ICANN or any of its subordinates. ICANN has power because we have chosen their databases as the root of said power. Even the fact that 'news.ycombinator.com' leads here is a de facto consensus since the Internet could, theoretically, switch roots tomorrow and completely invalidate every domain name. It won't happen, much to the chagrin of alt-root operators from the 90s and 2000s and contemporary attempts like NameCoin[0], but it can, and there is absolutely nothing ICANN could do about it. They charge admission to a well-maintained database that underpins this whole show, and that's pretty much the entirety of what they do. It's on all of us to tend to the best interests of the Internet, and way too many people with access forget that. However, with responsibility like that also comes opportunity: once you realize that it's basically all of our good faith and de facto consensus holding this thing together, the barrier to entry for you to get involved with the Internet is suddenly far lower. [0]: Oh yes, it's been tried, a lot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root