[discuss] Possible approaches to solving "problem no. 1"

Seun Ojedeji seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Tue Feb 18 14:51:47 UTC 2014

sent from Google nexus 4
kindly excuse brevity and typos.
On 18 Feb 2014 14:57, "JFC Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
> At 10:57 18/02/2014, Avri Doria wrote:
>> I believe the AOC review mechanisms are the ICANN accountability
mechanism.  I am still waiting to see in practice whether the current ICANN
regime takes it more seriously, in practice - not just in words, than the
previous regime.
>> While California Law may make the Board supreme at ICANN, in actuality
it isn't, it is the Review Teams that are, and any failure of the Board and
the Corporation to response appropriately is the sign of ICANN not being
accountable.  For now, I still think it may possibly be living up to its
accountability structure, but I am not a very trusting sort when it comes
to corporations, so am waiting to see what is done with the ATRT2 report.
> Dear Avri,
> I followed the discussion regarding US sovereignty on my old file. I
think that everything has been said. Laws are for the inside. Power is for
> Snowden tried to make it understood: never trust another power than your
own and fully use your capacities.
> Shoot first, discuss later. Because this is what others will do.
> Look, I am French, from a European country. This list was created by an
African. Why do you want me to care about US and Californian laws? All I
know is that these laws can be a threat to my use of my network that I pay
for with my money. Until now, I feared crime more than the USG; this is why
I did not fully explain VGNs/Layer6 along RFCs earlier.
> Snowden has changed the threats balance on me, in showing that internet
technology was too vulnerable to national security and private intelligence
agencies and, therefore, most probably to cyber-attacks, and that my
private data were probably safer at Google than at the NSA (recursive "curl
-O" for 1.7 million secret files scattered around the world). Mike Roberts
(First ICANN CEO and instrumental in its creation) then explained that
anything regarding the internet US umbrella would be legitimately
scrutinized by influent patriot US Congressmen. Now that everything is
better known by everyone, I estimated that now the Congressmen would
protect us against crime, we could protect ourselves against US
Congressmen, and force our own representatives to carry their national
precautionary duty.
> Therefore, the discussion now is how the US Gov's, and the French Gov's,
and the British Gov's, and the Chinese Gov's, etc. (the list is in ISO
3166) and corporations', and the CS NGOs', and the entrepreneurs', and
FLOSS, etc.  *precautionary powerful capacities* can digitally protect us
now, inside, outside, and tomorrow.
> You are a CS techie: one of the first to decide, for your own operations.
Will you join the creation of a (FLOSS Internet Name and Numbers Secondary
Information Center) FLINN-SIC, incorporated outside of the US and destined
to cooperate with the other VGNICs, including ICANN as the USG's VGNIC,
toward the stability, security, and development of the internet and its
subsequent higher layer strata?
+++1 if every other individual on this list could put this question in
perspective(specific to them) and attempt to respond, perhaps we will
finally have made progress!

> jfc
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140218/bdc7e0bc/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list