[discuss] Net Neutrality: Perhaps the FCC is the wrong agency?

Wed Jun 4 14:24:38 UTC 2014

At 05:15 04/06/2014, willi uebelherr wrote:
>Am 03/06/2014 18:30, schrieb Michel S. Gauthier:
>>...
>>Anyway, for a global network one needs a global solution. This is what
>>NTIA looks for but the idea of a structural organization (ICANN) is
>>anachronic. This has to be a neutral algorithm based protocol.
>
>Dear Michel,
>no, it is not a needs. The globalisation comes from the possibility 
>to act globally. But never the system need any globalisation in his design.
>If we use the bottom-up strategy we come immediatly to the global 
>activity without any special intention to act as global players.
>The only requirements for that is the IP header. The contents of the 
>packets underly the definition of the communication partners.
>
>many greetings, willi
>Jinotepe, Nicaragua

Willi,

The paradigmatic change of our time is fundamental. This because it 
actually is a review of the last 2 millennia and a half humanity's 
paradigm. What we debate is a direct reviewing of the foundational 
debate of our civilization between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle (+ 
Euclides for sciences). The reason why is simple enough: for 125 
years (since Jan 1889) we are progressively ***demonstrating*** what 
the legacy of their predecessors (Anaxagoras, Democrites, Zeno, 
Pythagoras) had only ***foreseen***.

These demonstrations range from the "n-body" problem non-resolution 
by Henri Poincaré, Plank's quanta, Einstein relativity, Gödel 
incompleteness, Wiener cybernetics, Norman Hardy agorics, Louis 
Pouzin datagrams to the still uncompleted interneting and the bio++ 
discoveries.  What all have in common is the discovery of an 
extremely fruitful relation between continuity and discontinuity, 
i.e. numerality and digitality.

During the last two millennia and a half,
- architectonics (an Aristotelian concept as logic) is the 
understanding of the way things work. This corresponds to the norm, 
i.e. the description of normality. In Athens this was the "thema", 
the laws of the gods, i.e. of the universe.
- architecture is the way you want to design the things. This 
corresponds to the standards, i.e. how thing must be done. In old 
Greece this was introduced as the nomos, the law of the people 
through the democracy they invented.
- "how to", the "patria", the family customs, was what we name the 
best practices.

This is why Aristotle says that the man is a political animal, 
politics being the science of commanding free men and make them 
happy, which first calls on architectonics.

This is changing. Some call it the "technological singularity". 
Singularity is not that machines would become more clever than men 
and supersede them. Singularity is that men have discovered their 
digitality built of billions of discontinuities (bits: from natural 
quanta, to genome, to neurone, to cells, etc. and has mastered the 
concept enough to build artificial digitalizes from computer, 
networks, to personal digitalities). Politics is now the science of 
commanding free ***connected*** men, and architectonics has extended 
from knowing how the human environment is built, to knowing how to 
build it to assist the governance of these free connected men.

Up to now, since Aristotle, the human city was governed by three 
Archons: the eponymous (the President), the Basileus (Home Land) for 
the city's interior's issues and the Polemach (Secretary of State) 
for the exterior's issues including war. Now, we need a new Archon: 
the Architach to care for the city's ulterior's issues. To prevent 
the future to harm the city and the people; i.e. assuming the State's 
precaution duty.

In this context what you name "grassroots", is the multitude, as long 
they do not rally an Architach. Multitude are the sovereignty 
boundless informed and independent people/citizens/lead-users, i.e. 
"IUsers". They are the stand-alone citizens when the State is failing 
or disappearing (as the NTIA does?).

Obviously, it is far easier for them to aggregate on a proximity 
basis. The geographic proximity is therefore one of the easiest one 
to consider to build locality upon. But any other kind of proximity 
is OK (today the dominant one is the US commercial proximity). Then 
these localities are confronted to the universe's globality and weave 
their network there. This is the "local Virtual Global Network" 
phenomenon. In other technologies it is named the "closed user 
group". Actually the internet is an aggregation of VGN (CUGs in the 
telephone area).

In this aggregate of Masters' VGN and Lasters'VGN that makes the 
internet there is no core. It is purely distributed and meshed. There 
is therefore the need to address things through an architectonics 
referential system, i.e. a system which does not depend on people, 
but on the universe itself or at least to a sufficiently stable and 
large part of it, i.e. a purely algorithmic hazardous portion of it.

This is what a fail-secure plan for the net is about: understanding 
the way it should work for the nets.

jfc