[discuss] we need to fix what may be broken

Thu Apr 17 14:29:53 UTC 2014

Avri,

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.

The key outcome is to find the locus of the decisions that need be made in
each case.

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.)

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.

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.

(some restrictions apply)

The rest has been said exhaustively.

Yours,

Alejandro Pisanty

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Well said George.
>
> It has taken me a while to undeerstand the implications of Bertrand de
> la Chapelle model that  ‘lets us  "differentiate between governance of
> the Internet and governance on the Internet.'
>
> While I think there are border areas where the differentiation will be
> fuzzy, and there are interactions between 'governance of' and
> 'governance on', I think this is a very useful methodology to apply in
> any analysis.
>
> avri
>
>
> On 17-Apr-14 09:38, George Sadowsky wrote:
> > Hi, Carlos,
> >
> > I think that we may be talking across each other.  I am still sort of
> > a techie, although my skills are more of the 20th century than of the
> > 21st.  But I ally myself with both the technical community and civil
> > society; I’ve worked in both fields, and I see the merits of both.
> >
> > I consider freedom of expression very important.  I don’t argue for
> > complete freedom of expression; neither do the Europeans, and the
> > Americans do not permit you to yell “fire!” in a crowded theater.
> > However, nearly complete freedom of expression, if aI can label it
> > that, is a precious freedom, and I support it.
> >
> > In your example, of a blogger murdered by order of a politician, how
> > would your stand on free expression be different if it were a
> > newspaper reporter, murdered by a politician, for exactly the same
> > content.  I think that you would be equally angry, and so would I.
> > the point is that the Internet is not implicated in your example,
> > just as the newspaper  is not implicate in my rewrite of your
> > example.
> >
> > Bertrand de la Chapelle said it best at the NCUC meeting in
> > Singapore.  He said, ‘let’s differentiate between governance of the
> > Internet and governance on the Internet."  It’s my belief that the
> > vast majority of the technical community is in signifiant agreement
> > with most members of civil society with respect to issues regarding
> > governance on the Internet.  After all, we are all inhabitants of the
> > planet, and we want common freedoms and liberties.
> >
> > Where I think we cross paths is that the technical community sees
> > these concerns crossing over into governance of the Internet, hoping
> > that we subject the governance to increased control of some sort,
> > problems of society on the Internet will be ameliorated. If so, we
> > should be equally concerned about governance of the newspaper
> > industry, governance of the content of school textbooks, and
> > governance of the industry that publishes books — clearly a dangerous
> > medium of communication.
> >
> > We are concerned because we have something that works as a technical
> > instrument to distribute information from anyone to anyone.  Barring
> > the interference of governments that are sovereign in their space
> > (conveniently forgetting Ukraine for the moment), this distributed
> > architecture and the hundreds of thousands of technical people that
> > support it operationally — in the small and in the large — has scaled
> > massively and works as well or better than any other knowledge
> > distribution channel that the world has ever seen.  We do not want it
> > compromised by having it managed by people who do not understand it,
> > and we do not want it blamed for societal issues that mistakenly
> > imply that the basic management of the Internet is culpable for the
> > problems of society.
> >
> > The technical community is responsive to the needs of society.
> > Improvements in research and education were one of the primary
> > motivators to build and extend the network. The technical community
> > was in large part responsible for organizational innovations such as
> > the meritocracy-based standards approach pioneered in the IETF, which
> > has been extraordinarily successful.  Members of the technical
> > community are generally supportive of much of what representatives of
> > civil society causes are espousing at Net Mundial.  I believe that we
> > are generally very much in favor of your calls for free expression
> > and human rights; we would like to see those calls succeed.  And, to
> > the extent that they are consistent with the security, stability, and
> > resiliency of the Internet, with your help we can improve the
> > services that the Internet provides.
> >
> > Bet, let’s not create, even in our minds, artificial barriers to
> > understanding, in both directions, even in our minds.
> >
> > George (speaking solely on my own behalf, as always in this
> > discussion spar)
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140417/44d4e17a/attachment-0001.html>