United Nations - Internet

[actnow]

It has been suggested a few times that the United Nations should have control
of the internet.

I could write 10,000 words why this would be a bad idea. But, I will list
just a couple points.

The United Nations would see this as a cash cow to tax the wealthest countries
to assist the poorer countries. So, the poorer countries could benefit from
the internet.

I am sure someone will come up with an idea to apply a $ 0.01 fee for every
email sent. They would say this would elliminate all of the spam. But, the U.N.
would also create "free zones" to support the advancement of the internet in the
poorer countries. So, all of the spammers will set up mail drops in Zaire to continue the spammings.

However, the wealther users (persons and businesses) will be paying alot for emails.

You can also imagine what they would do with the the yearly fees for domains.
(I will leave that to your imagination.)

You are talking about a organization that does a number of good things. But, as a
general rule, they can not make a decisive decision about anything.

Plus, a general rule, they are accountable to no one.

For our U.S. members, it would be similar to having the U.S. govt be constructed
as the U.S. Senate as the ruling body. (No House of Representative.)
and, the President would be appointed by the the Senate.

The poorer states will have as much power as the wealthest.
Therefore, North Dakota will be equal to California, NY, etc.

And, do you want the U.N. cutting off the internet to South Africa or Israel because "we"
don't agree with your philosophies.

And, you are giving countries (where decisions are made by corruption and bribery
for hundreds of years), the potential influence to the life blood of commerce - internet.

The League of Nations and eventually the U.N. has done some good for the world.
But, when it comes to commerce - It would similiar to putting a kid in a candy shop.

 

[bidawinner]

actnow..

Gates ALREADY wants to charge for email to get rid of spam.. But.. If I have to pay for my email I would rather have a .001 tax to help the educate the poorer nations with the internet than I would have it go to Microsofts bottom Line..because I see it as an investment ..the faster they rise out of their personal hell holes the easier it wil be for them to take care of themsleves (less expensive for everyone else in the long run.. AND the faster you can get them to being productive ..the faster they start consuming goods services...which helps everyones bottom line..(not just microsofts ) Look at Russia.. (even with their current troubles , Look at China and how fast they are turning from backwoods to the forefront ... India and Pakistain are benefiting extremely well from the internet.. think of all the people in the world that $200 a month was a living wage and now they are making 2,3 ,4 , 100 times that a month ..because the internet iopened up the world to them..

So yeah ,if I can pitch in an odd penny or so and I knew it was going to set up Internet infrastructer in the poorest of nations .. sure lets domit is my take on it.
The problem always comes down to fraud , cheaters , Administrative cost (cough cough ) ..allthat BS. .. if the money really gets to bringing computers and the internet in to the people..ok

A hike in yearly domain fees would probably add value to the domains .. compared to anyoen can get a FREE .Info


I agree though UN should not have control over the internet.. it wont ever happen anyway.. The UN should IMO simply be a an organization of Nations the rushes to the aid of countries in times of crises , floods, volcanos etc. to set up security and provide immediate relief

 

[ExpireGuy]

you are giving countries (where decisions are made by corruption and bribery
for hundreds of years), the potential influence to the life blood of commerce - internet.

Depending on your geography and political view.....that could apply to just about every country in the world.

The League of Nations and eventually the U.N. has done some good for the world.

Well..at least they've done some good....which is more than I can say for the current embodiement (ICCAN)...the only good they know is of the no good persuasion.

As for the speculative email tax......if it helps a third world nation in a positive way...why not. It'll make me sleep better knowing the crap in my junk mail folder could somehow be a catalyst for giving a kid a breakfast in Ethiopia.

 

[cambler]

That's a somewhat naive viewpoint, I think. Poor nations already receive quite a lot in foreign and private aid. Most of it never gets to the people, but is intercepted by corrupt governments and/or warlords/dictators. Even the UN cannot put a stop to this, as the security council will rarely order military enforcement of aid delivery.

It's no a funding issue at all. It's a resources and political issue. No amount of money will resolve it.

 

[bidawinner]

That's a somewhat naive viewpoint, I think. Poor nations already receive quite a lot in foreign and private aid. Most of it never gets to the people, but is intercepted by corrupt governments and/or warlords/dictators. Even the UN cannot put a stop to this, as the security council will rarely order military enforcement of aid delivery.

It's no a funding issue at all. It's a resources and political issue. No amount of money will resolve it.

Who said anything about "aid" ..this isnt about bringing in truckloads of food ..but bringing in education... hooking these countries up to wireless and start handing out hundreds of thosands of used computers ..so the PEOPLE can help themselves..

It's naive to keep thinking that warloads and corrupt governments can prevent people from lifting themselves out such situations..if happens everyday.. get the right equipment in and you can speed the process

 

[cambler]

Who said anything about "aid" ..this isnt about bringing in truckloads of food ..but bringing in education... hooking these countries up to wireless and start handing out hundreds of thosands of used computers ..so the PEOPLE can help themselves..

It's naive to keep thinking that warloads and corrupt governments can prevent people from lifting themselves out such situations..if happens everyday.. get the right equipment in and you can speed the process

A post, above, mentioned breakfast for an Etheopian kid. That's aid.

So you'd hook up wireless in the country? And what happens when, the next day, technicians hooking it up are killed and the wireless broadcast points are stolen and sold?

It's naive to keep thinking that warlords and corrupt governments can be toppled by trying to lift up populations. It's in their best interest to keep the population down, and that's what they'll do. You bring in infrastructure and if you're lucky they'll let you live and leave before they steal the equipment. You can't help a population to lift itself up until you get rid of the people who are keeping them down. And that, alas, requires force.

 

[seeker]

The UN cant make decitions because a few countries dont allow them to!
come on...
The UN, assuming it would have been a 'real' UN, which of course it is NOT, could run things fine.

 

[mike031]

heh... easier said then done k:

 

[gogeorge]

The UN cant make decitions because a few countries dont allow them to!
come on...
The UN, assuming it would have been a 'real' UN, which of course it is NOT, could run things fine.

Kofi Annans son was responsible for the oil for food program.

He has received tens of millions in kick backs. IN fact the UN which the US funds most of refuses to let outside auditors look at the books of these programs.

Former Fed chairman Volker is trying to investigate but can't.

The UN is nice place to get generous contracts with no oversight process.

Most of these guys are becoming multi millionaires.

 

[bidawinner]

A post, above, mentioned breakfast for an Etheopian kid. That's aid.

So you'd hook up wireless in the country? And what happens when, the next day, technicians hooking it up are killed and the wireless broadcast points are stolen and sold?

It's naive to keep thinking that warlords and corrupt governments can be toppled by trying to lift up populations. It's in their best interest to keep the population down, and that's what they'll do. You bring in infrastructure and if you're lucky they'll let you live and leave before they steal the equipment. You can't help a population to lift itself up until you get rid of the people who are keeping them down. And that, alas, requires force.

Total Nonsense Ambler..dont you EVER acknowledge when you are wrong? ever ?

They will not only help you build the towers . ..they'll help you protect them ..with the right incentives.. broaden your imagination a few ticks past "no"

 

[seeker]

the US owes the UN millions.... in $

It does NOT work that way.
The UN has become a play toy for world powers.
It has lost credibility not because of its own lack of action, but by the cutting of its bal*s by 5 specific members...

They will not only help you build the towers . ..they'll help you protect them ..with the right incentives.. broaden your imagination a few ticks past "no"

????????????????????

 

[cambler]

Total Nonsense Ambler..dont you EVER acknowledge when you are wrong? ever ?

They will not only help you build the towers . ..they'll help you protect them ..with the right incentives.. broaden your imagination a few ticks past "no"

Are you kidding me? Go take a look at the UN reports on aid distribution results for just about any African nation. You'll find that the vast majority of aid shipments are routed to the private caches of those in power. You'll find that the majority of food shipments go to feed the armies, not the populace.

The food goes to the armies and the infrastructure is stolen, sold, and the proceeds used to buy weapons.

Check out the situation we had in 2000, when the Eritrean government agreed to allow food shipments into Ethiopia, their bitter enemy, if Ethiopia would promise that the food would not go to feed their army.

I quote: "In war situations, international food aid delivery is usually closely monitored since donors do not want to be accused of feeding the war machine. But in this case, the Ethiopian government demanded control. It required that all food be handled through its own agency, the Disaster Prevention and Preparedness Commission, a leftover from previous droughts."

Source: Boston Sunday Globe, 2000

That war has now killed an estimated 80,000 people. Ethiopia has spent $480 million on its military effort, money freed up by food aid from the outside.

I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong. This isn't one of those times.

 

[Anthony Ng]

United Nations? I thought PriceWaterhouseCoopers was running the world, wasn't it?

 

[seeker]

no, McDonards is.
(spelling mistake on purpose)

 

[Cash Is King]

I agree though UN should not have control over the internet.. it wont ever happen anyway.. The UN should IMO simply be a an organization of Nations the rushes to the aid of countries in times of crises , floods, volcanos etc. to set up security and provide immediate relief

Bidawinner

You are right on the money. The UN can only be good for reactive types of responsibilties, like rushing to the aid of other countries after a catastrophy. It sounds as if they should incorporate under the name "international red cross"

The UN cant make decitions because a few countries dont allow them to!
come on...
The UN, assuming it would have been a 'real' UN, which of course it is NOT, could run things fine.

The UN could not find its way out of a cardboard box. Let alone make any type of decision that is proactive rather than reactive.

 

[seeker]

I will TRY to no longer participate in this thread.

The foundations of the UN were very different from what it is allowed to do.
The 'first aid' type of responsibiities were assinged to it when the few who rule the UN (look at its chapter, they are 5 nations) stopped agreeing with each other.
The UN became a joke.
It is a joke.

 

[stevey]

i dont think it is possible for them to do that, the internet doesnt belong to anyone, its a large collection of networks that are joined together passing info. noone can control illigal downloads, so how they gonna control it? alot of people would like to own/control the internet, but its just like me saying i now own the sun, you all better start paying me for the sunlight your using

 

[bidawinner]

I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong. This isn't one of those times.

It's never one of those timesis it ambler ?lol

Ok , drop the Ethiopia , Dufar sudan crisis situation, get past that.. that is an entirely diofferent topic..

What I am talking about is "regular folk" like in Kenya.. 90% Literate ,but the opportunities for them to rise above the squaler of everyday life is not there..the internet can have an impact in many of their lives they can reach out to World Markets (instead of one depressed economy).. these people arent stupid ..once giving the right tools (a computer and access) they can find ways to increase their income levels FAR above the normal income of their country ..they then spend that money in their local markets ..helping their communities as a whole..

They start to invest in their community.. they hire people ..those people now have more money to spend on consumables.. the market starts to rise .......

Look at you ..hell you were once just an ego maniac running around your community ..now your an ego manic with money because of the internet :cheeky: ..surely if it can work in your case it can work in these hard workethic people's lives ..

So once again ..I say if it ever comes to the point where we have to pay for our email..I wouldnt mind seeing a small tax.of .001 or so that goes towards building internet infrastrcter in the pooer nations of the world.. because I know the more access to the outside world .. the more educated they will become and the more opportunities they will have..and eventual customers they will be...

but back to the main topic.. I already said it's a bad idea for the UN to be involved in running the internet

 

[ExpireGuy]

A post, above, mentioned breakfast for an Etheopian kid. That's aid.

True....but my underlying sincerity in reference to an "unestablished" email tax that would enable the betterment of a underdeveloped country through monies funneled by the UN remain intact. The same monies, I'll now address, that would run in reference to views similar to bidawinners in many regards.

So you'd hook up wireless in the country? And what happens when, the next day, technicians hooking it up are killed and the wireless broadcast points are stolen and sold?

It's naive to keep thinking that warlords and corrupt governments can be toppled by trying to lift up populations. It's in their best interest to keep the population down, and that's what they'll do. You bring in infrastructure and if you're lucky they'll let you live and leave before they steal the equipment. You can't help a population to lift itself up until you get rid of the people who are keeping them down. And that, alas, requires force.

Using force also induces bloodshed and compromises weak infrastructures already in place. Not to mention the possibility of leaving the said oppressed in a bigger mess than they were in to begin with.
There's no quick fix, but I'll take the "try" rather than die (kill) approach thank you.....

 

[cambler]

There's no quick fix, but I'll take the "try" rather than die (kill) approach thank you.....

Not with my money, please. That "try" would be a waste. Perhaps in countries that don't have oppressive governments (as pointed out, above), but those are few in number.

And regardless, the UN is the last entity I'd want to do it. Just their overhead alone means pennies on the dollar would reach the ultimate recipients.