[discuss] Possible approaches to solving "problem no. 1"
jcurran at istaff.org
Wed Feb 26 23:25:02 UTC 2014
On Feb 26, 2014, at 8:29 AM, Jefsey <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
> 3. the citizen has no asset in country B and his legal infringement in country B is legal in country A. He is protected from country B.
> (there can be intermediary cases when he can be punished in A but not extraded, etc.)
> Now country B may decide to hit the virtual assets of the citizen in country A through a cyberattack. The citizen is then entitled to ask the protection of his country which may chose to compensate him and/or attack assets of country B.
I'm sorry - are you truly advocating that the model we should propose for
government engagement in the global Internet is NOT one of mutual cooperation
(towards shared norms and principles) but instead based upon having countries
express their interests unilaterally in the form of national laws and then
exercising cyberattacks on those parties _in other countries_ whose actions
don't comply with such national laws?
I will state unequivocally that we (collectively) can do better, and indeed,
the people of world deserve a much better model of governance for the global
Internet. That may not provide you your desired ability to use the Internet
based solely on the interests of expressed by any one country, but then again,
that's why the Internet is global.
Disclaimer: My views alone (although I suspect there may be others who feel
More information about the discuss