4 ms·

I worry that brussels and the UN are both just as bad as the US government, only a number of years behind them. The UN doesn't throw its weight around violatin

I worry that brussels and the UN are both just as bad as the US government, only a number of years behind them. The UN doesn't throw its weight around violating people's rights in large part because it doesn't have the power to do so. I think the entire DNS system needs to be out of the hands of government bodies of any type, preferably relying on a cooperative, distributed solution, like the internet itself (theoretically) does/can. I think it is amazing how divorced from US law the US government has become. Seizing domains without having previously gotten a conviction for a crime is against the law, and the idea that a DNS lookup is the same as "routing all traffic thru the US" is absurd as well. DNS records are cached globally. I'm afraid that the solutions will have to be technical, and not governmental.

tobylane 15y ago
Oh? I kind of see it as the US gov have already been throwing their weight around, and the spare tire is hitting us all. Didn't Darpa recently not want to completely give up power over the internet, allowing something like this to happen?
slowpoke 15y ago
>I think the entire DNS system needs to be out of the hands of government bodies of any type, preferably relying on a cooperative, distributed solution, like the internet itself (theoretically) does/can. There was a small project a while back at the start of the domain seizures where a few people tried to develop a .p2p domain that relied on, you guessed it, peer to peer distribution of DNS records, effectively making it impossible to seize domains. I don't really know where it went, but considering I've never heard of them again I'd say the project's dead.
- Zash 15y ago
  From http://dot-p2p.org/ http://dot-p2p.org/ > We currently believe the best way to create a stable environment for TLDs is to enact a central authority. We know this will cause much argument within the community, but we have made the decision that we believe will be best for the continued development of this project. That, being against the whole point of it, probably killed it.

tobylane 15y ago

Oh? I kind of see it as the US gov have already been throwing their weight around, and the spare tire is hitting us all. Didn't Darpa recently not want to completely give up power over the internet, allowing something like this to happen?

slowpoke 15y ago

>I think the entire DNS system needs to be out of the hands of government bodies of any type, preferably relying on a cooperative, distributed solution, like the internet itself (theoretically) does/can. There was a small project a while back at the start of the domain seizures where a few people tried to develop a .p2p domain that relied on, you guessed it, peer to peer distribution of DNS records, effectively making it impossible to seize domains. I don't really know where it went, but considering I've never heard of them again I'd say the project's dead.

Zash 15y ago
From http://dot-p2p.org/ http://dot-p2p.org/ > We currently believe the best way to create a stable environment for TLDs is to enact a central authority. We know this will cause much argument within the community, but we have made the decision that we believe will be best for the continued development of this project. That, being against the whole point of it, probably killed it.