3 ms·

1) Doreen Bogdan-Martin has already been successfully elected as Secretary-General, so it's a bit weird to post this now (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63

1) Doreen Bogdan-Martin has already been successfully elected as Secretary-General, so it's a bit weird to post this now (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63074895 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63074895) 2) This is fearmongering. The ITU doesn't really have control over the protocols they talk about and, although the Secretary-General, can, of course, set the direction of the agency's program work, at the end these bigger decisions are taken by Member States by consensus, who are ultimately the ones running the show. The previous Secretary-Generals were Chinese and we didn't see a turn like the one prophetized in the article either. For a better take, listen to the latest episode of the Inside Geneva podcast: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/insidegeneva https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/insidegeneva

jaywalk 4y ago
Fearmongering from a (former?) spook at the CIA? I'm shocked!
- Natsu 4y ago
  > Should Ismailov win, he would serve as a conduit for the government of Russia’s internet policy goals, which historically have included censoring dissent. Good thing that has never happened in the USA.
  - api 4y ago
    There's a huge difference between people being booted off proprietary hosting systems (Cloudflare) or platforms (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) and censorship at the IP and BGP level with deep packet inspection and real time filtering. The Internet in the USA and much of the world remains pretty damn neutral. It doesn't care much what bits you send over it. That's not the case in China, Russia, and a number of other more authoritarian countries. We can encrypt everything of course, but if the censorship is at the wire level that may not be enough. Using meta-data, IPs tied to identities, and loads of other information sources it's possible to dynamically filter content and people by inference.
    - personasdfghjkl 4y ago
      The American internet may be neutral but that means little when the legal system doesn't respect freedom of the press. For example, isn't Julian Assange is being prosecuted right now because he exposed government wrongdoing?
    - Natsu 4y ago
      "At least we're not China" has to be the lowest possible bar you could have picked. And it doesn't make a lot of sense as a point of comparison when the other candidate mentioned in the article isn't even Chinese.
      - w0de0 4y ago
        You set the bar, not him, by inviting the comparison. Moreover, the poster makes the point that freedom of association, a component of free speech, requires private censorship - a feature, not a bug.
        Natsu 4y ago
        > You set the bar, not him, by inviting the comparison. Would you like to explain to me how Ismailov became Chinese all of a sudden?
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

jaywalk 4y ago

Fearmongering from a (former?) spook at the CIA? I'm shocked!

Natsu 4y ago
> Should Ismailov win, he would serve as a conduit for the government of Russia’s internet policy goals, which historically have included censoring dissent. Good thing that has never happened in the USA.
- api 4y ago
  There's a huge difference between people being booted off proprietary hosting systems (Cloudflare) or platforms (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) and censorship at the IP and BGP level with deep packet inspection and real time filtering. The Internet in the USA and much of the world remains pretty damn neutral. It doesn't care much what bits you send over it. That's not the case in China, Russia, and a number of other more authoritarian countries. We can encrypt everything of course, but if the censorship is at the wire level that may not be enough. Using meta-data, IPs tied to identities, and loads of other information sources it's possible to dynamically filter content and people by inference.
  - personasdfghjkl 4y ago
    The American internet may be neutral but that means little when the legal system doesn't respect freedom of the press. For example, isn't Julian Assange is being prosecuted right now because he exposed government wrongdoing?
  - Natsu 4y ago
    "At least we're not China" has to be the lowest possible bar you could have picked. And it doesn't make a lot of sense as a point of comparison when the other candidate mentioned in the article isn't even Chinese.
    - w0de0 4y ago
      You set the bar, not him, by inviting the comparison. Moreover, the poster makes the point that freedom of association, a component of free speech, requires private censorship - a feature, not a bug.
      - Natsu 4y ago
        > You set the bar, not him, by inviting the comparison. Would you like to explain to me how Ismailov became Chinese all of a sudden?
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]