<div dir="ltr">Avri,<div><br></div><div>this "of and on" is a rephrasing of the layers principle which many, many of us have used to dissect (when possible), understand, and solve Internet governance problems. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The key outcome is to find the locus of the decisions that need be made in each case. </div><div><br></div><div>A very basic example is provided by the naming of ccTLDs, where at a very early time Postel decided to use someone else's authoritative decisions on what is and is not a country, and what two-letter codes to use to identify them (RFC 1591 as reference.) </div>
<div><br></div><div>The technical community has responsibly avoided, as much as possible, hard-coding in technology (standards or operations) laws, rights, court practices, etc. For all I see the technical community does not fear isses outside its remit and in fact the silo view of techies as nerds without a life is a flawed caricature. For all I see they/we create and operate systems in a way that is as netural as possible with respect to laws etc. so that the systems can evolve and scale.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The success of the Internet provides proof for the wisdom of this decision; the Internet works in countries that have either a case-law, a Continental, or no rule of law at all.</div><div><br></div><div>
(some restrictions apply)</div><div><br></div><div>The rest has been said exhaustively.</div><div><br></div><div>Yours,</div><div><br></div><div>Alejandro Pisanty</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
<br>
Well said George.<br>
<br>
It has taken me a while to undeerstand the implications of Bertrand de<br>
la Chapelle model that ‘lets us "differentiate between governance of<br>
the Internet and governance on the Internet.'<br>
<br>
While I think there are border areas where the differentiation will be<br>
fuzzy, and there are interactions between 'governance of' and<br>
'governance on', I think this is a very useful methodology to apply in<br>
any analysis.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
<br>
On 17-Apr-14 09:38, George Sadowsky wrote:<br>
> Hi, Carlos,<br>
><br>
> I think that we may be talking across each other. I am still sort of<br>
> a techie, although my skills are more of the 20th century than of the<br>
> 21st. But I ally myself with both the technical community and civil<br>
> society; I’ve worked in both fields, and I see the merits of both.<br>
><br>
> I consider freedom of expression very important. I don’t argue for<br>
> complete freedom of expression; neither do the Europeans, and the<br>
> Americans do not permit you to yell “fire!” in a crowded theater.<br>
> However, nearly complete freedom of expression, if aI can label it<br>
> that, is a precious freedom, and I support it.<br>
><br>
> In your example, of a blogger murdered by order of a politician, how<br>
> would your stand on free expression be different if it were a<br>
> newspaper reporter, murdered by a politician, for exactly the same<br>
> content. I think that you would be equally angry, and so would I.<br>
> the point is that the Internet is not implicated in your example,<br>
> just as the newspaper is not implicate in my rewrite of your<br>
> example.<br>
><br>
> Bertrand de la Chapelle said it best at the NCUC meeting in<br>
> Singapore. He said, ‘let’s differentiate between governance of the<br>
> Internet and governance on the Internet." It’s my belief that the<br>
> vast majority of the technical community is in signifiant agreement<br>
> with most members of civil society with respect to issues regarding<br>
> governance on the Internet. After all, we are all inhabitants of the<br>
> planet, and we want common freedoms and liberties.<br>
><br>
> Where I think we cross paths is that the technical community sees<br>
> these concerns crossing over into governance of the Internet, hoping<br>
> that we subject the governance to increased control of some sort,<br>
> problems of society on the Internet will be ameliorated. If so, we<br>
> should be equally concerned about governance of the newspaper<br>
> industry, governance of the content of school textbooks, and<br>
> governance of the industry that publishes books — clearly a dangerous<br>
> medium of communication.<br>
><br>
> We are concerned because we have something that works as a technical<br>
> instrument to distribute information from anyone to anyone. Barring<br>
> the interference of governments that are sovereign in their space<br>
> (conveniently forgetting Ukraine for the moment), this distributed<br>
> architecture and the hundreds of thousands of technical people that<br>
> support it operationally — in the small and in the large — has scaled<br>
> massively and works as well or better than any other knowledge<br>
> distribution channel that the world has ever seen. We do not want it<br>
> compromised by having it managed by people who do not understand it,<br>
> and we do not want it blamed for societal issues that mistakenly<br>
> imply that the basic management of the Internet is culpable for the<br>
> problems of society.<br>
><br>
> The technical community is responsive to the needs of society.<br>
> Improvements in research and education were one of the primary<br>
> motivators to build and extend the network. The technical community<br>
> was in large part responsible for organizational innovations such as<br>
> the meritocracy-based standards approach pioneered in the IETF, which<br>
> has been extraordinarily successful. Members of the technical<br>
> community are generally supportive of much of what representatives of<br>
> civil society causes are espousing at Net Mundial. I believe that we<br>
> are generally very much in favor of your calls for free expression<br>
> and human rights; we would like to see those calls succeed. And, to<br>
> the extent that they are consistent with the security, stability, and<br>
> resiliency of the Internet, with your help we can improve the<br>
> services that the Internet provides.<br>
><br>
> Bet, let’s not create, even in our minds, artificial barriers to<br>
> understanding, in both directions, even in our minds.<br>
><br>
> George (speaking solely on my own behalf, as always in this<br>
> discussion spar)<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty<br>Facultad de Química UNAM<br>Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico<br>
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD<br>+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475<br>Blog: <a href="http://pisanty.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://pisanty.blogspot.com</a><br>LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty</a><br>
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614</a><br>Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/apisanty" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/apisanty</a><br>
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, <a href="http://www.isoc.org" target="_blank">http://www.isoc.org</a><br>. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
</div>