Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I went to your link expecting to find an example of people pretending that porn doesn't exist, and didn't find one.

    I did find an interesting discussion about the ICANN, but it offered no solution: if the U.S. does not control it, who does? The UN? Oh yeah, that'd be great: they would probably revoke Israel's TLD. And if it is private, will that make it immune from influences -- mostly governmental and corporate -- or even more susceptible, in ways less obvious or detectable? I'd bet on the latter.

    Also,
    • I find it very alarming that the US abused its authority to force the ICANN to abide to its political agenda. And for what reason? Well, a very silly one: if there is no TLD for porn, then porn on the internet doesn't exist.

      That's a huge waste of effort, if you ask me. They should rather try do something worthwhile.

      Also, you assertion that the USA is the best one to control what happens to the internet, is very biased and unjustified [citypages.com]. I think the chance of the USA revoking top level domains for Iraq, Iran,
      • by pudge (1) on 2006.08.11 20:49 (#49316) Homepage Journal
        Well, a very silly one: if there is no TLD for porn, then porn on the internet doesn't exist.

        That's a straw man. No one is actually saying that.

        Also, you assertion that the USA is the best one to control what happens to the internet

        I made no such assertion. Read again.

        is very biased and unjustified

        Wow. Even if I DID make such an assertion -- which, again, I did not -- how could you possibly know that it is biased or unjustified, when I didn't explain my reasons (for a position, again, that I do not have)?

        This is worse than a straw man: you're not attacking positions I don't have, you're attacking positions I don't have without even knowing or caring what they are!

        I think the chance of the USA revoking top level domains for Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Korea, or whoever else they ever might consider an enemy, to be far greater than the risk of the UN doing it to Israel.

        I think you're obviously wrong, because there is plenty of pressure in the UN to do just this sort of thing (not with domain names, but in many other areas), and yet the U.S. has never engaged in any such thing, nor even hinted at it.

        Besides, what's your irrational defense of Israel's appaling behaviour anyway?

        I see no appalling behavior, so I see nothing to defend. (Talk about biased and irrational.) Perhaps you could phrase your question more intelligently?

        IMO, the ICANN should be neutral.

        Fine. As I noted in the first comment: how? Who controls it? I do not believe it is possible for an international organization to be neutral, but maybe you have an idea no one else has ever tried.