Man, I’m not sure what to make of this.

First, the article states that the US plans to keep control of the root servers, which basically is the same thing as having control. The biggest point being made was that more countries would have a vote as to what direction ICANN would take. This isn’t the best thing in the world.

I’m all about democracy, but I’m not about giving non-democratic countries votes. Period. This is part of the reason I want the US to stop funding and remove itself from the UN. Non democratic governments should have no voice in a body such as the UN. This is like asking a convicted thief what the rules should be for ‘stealing’.

Now, the level of technical know how I have about how the Internet actually works is limited. As a web developer, a lot of that stuff isn’t relevant to what I do. I write the code, the pages get delivered. End of story. The reason the Internet works the way it does is because of the sheer number of tubes and the way they’re connected. And being the ‘traffic cops’, the US doesn’t block what traffic goes where. I’m not sure that will happen when other countries get their fingers into the mix.

Other governments have already expressed and interest in shutting down access to things they deem inappropriate. Hell, it’s hard enough here in the states to keep the government out of our digital bedrooms. But to allow oppressive governments the ability to selectively administer who they think should and should not have access to specific information is a horrifying thought. From the article

When historians come to review events in Washington on 26 July 2006, they will no doubt be reminded of discussions in previous centuries over why individual citizens should be given a vote. Or, perhaps, why landowners or the educated classes shouldn't be given more votes than the masses.

The irony here being that many countries don’t give their people votes. And we want to cede control of the Internet to those people? I don’t know what scares me more, that little tidbit or the fact that the bint writing the article says it without the slighted hint of sarcasm.

Oh, and you gotta love the ‘objective’ reporting in this line

Ultimately, what came out of a gathering of the (English-speaking) great and the good regarding the internet was two things:

1. That the US government recognises it has to transition its role if it wants to keep the internet in one piece (and it then has to sell that decision to a mindlessly patriotic electorate)
2. That ICANN has to open up and allow more people to decide its course if it is going to be allowed to become the internet's main overseeing organisation

Mindless patriotism. Sheesh.