Jealous Countries want United States to Relinquish Internet “Control”

Another thing that irritates me is the fact that the rest of the world apparently things the United States should relinquish control of the root DNS servers. I’ll drop this link to a slashdot.org story for reference…

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/28/1734243

For those of you who are unfamiliar with how the Internet works I’ll give a brief explanation of the DNS (Domain Name System). Each website is located on a computer which has a number associated with it called an IP (Internet Protocol) address. For instance the IP address of this web site is 74.200.243.253 (actually that’s wordpress.com’s IP address which hosts me). Typing that address in would take you to wordpress.com

Of course numbers aren’t really useful to human being when it comes to associating things. Because of this we designed a system to translate names to IP addresses. When you type in www.google.com what is actually happening behind the scenes is your browser is asking a DNS server to return the IP address of www.google.com. Once the browser gets the IP address it accesses Google though the IP address.

So the DNS is pretty much a phone book for the Internet. And the master servers (called root servers) are the rulers of the roost. They are controlled by ICANN via contract from the United States Department of Commerce.

What many other countries are saying is since the Internet is a multi-national entity that the United States should give control of the DNS to some third party (usually the United Nation’s name is dropped). This is a case of pure jealously and idiocy.

The Internet is an evolution of ARPANET. ARPANET was created by the United States Department of Defense as a project to create a communication network that would survive a nuclear strike for the Soviets. Anyways through much work and finagling this evolved into the Internet that we know today.

This bring my first argument against surrendering control of the DNS over to some other entity. America invested the initial capital and research into the creation of the Internet. We then opened it up for everybody to use. Now being it was a government project apparently different rules apply to it. Because when a corporate creation becomes a world wide de facto item (like Microsoft Windows) no other government calls for it’s release to a third party. Releasing the DNS root servers to international oversight would be like Microsoft releasing the source code for Windows to international oversight. Yet nobody calls for that because it’s understood Microsoft put the initial capital and research (i.e. they bought DOS from a third party and rebranded it after some small adjustments) into Windows so they own it.

My next issue is this, the Internet is not censored. It’s an open means of communication which anybody can use, even an opinionated ass such as myself. This is accomplished for one main reason, the United State’s right of free speech. I can imagine the second some other entity such as the United Nations got control over the DNS censorship wouldn’t be far behind. For instance the United Nations is very anti-gun so I’m sure pro-gun sites would get axed. Being they have a lot of clout with the United Nations I’m sure the European Union could get a resolution passed to ban any negative talk about the Lisbon Treaty as well. Pretty much the bastion of free speech that we know of as the Internet would become akin to what China does with the Internet.

Problem three with the United States relinquishing control of the DNS is the fact that there is nothing stopping any other entity from starting their own root servers. The DNS is incredibly dynamic and anybody can setup a DNS server. Hell your network and work probably has one. If Britain wanted to control a DNS server they could most certainly set one up and use it. Nothing is stopping them. So instead of bitching they could try setting up their own system and force their citizens to use it.

Finally the system currently works. I’m a big fan of the idea that if something isn’t broken don’t fix it. The Internet works incredibly well at the moment so why the Hell should we do something drastic like rework the DNS? All that will do is break something and we’ll be fucked bad.

European Union Sues Sweden

Proving once again the European Union was a bad idea…

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/eu-sues-sweden-demands-law-requiring-isps-to-retain-data.ars

The European Union passed a law requiring ISPs to retain customer data “long enough to help police but not so long as to cause privacy concerns” (now THAT is some grade all bullshit). Sweden has not enacted this policy (probably because they have a little common sense left) so the European Union is suing.

I don’t know what they are going to get out of suing a member of their own union but like most things The Union does this is a pretty stupid idea.

And now for a side rant. If you just wanted the news article you can stop reading here. This side rant involves comments made on slashdot.org which I’ll link to in a bit. The actual rant is more to do with fanatic atheists though. First the link (do note because of the craptacularness of the comment system this may not take you to the actual thread I want, but hey I’m trying)…

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1247565&cid=28121785

What about this irritates me? Simple we have atheists who want to blame everything on religion. Don’t get me wrong I have nothing against atheists or atheism in general. Just like I have nothing against Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or any other form of religion or lack thereof. But I do have a problem with the zealots in all of these groups who try to blame every other religion (yes I’m calling atheism a religion in this case) for the world’s problems.

Being I visit technology sites I get exposed to far more zealot atheists then any other type of zealot. They love nothing more then highjacking a conversation and using it as a soapbox to preach their faith (yes faith, because these people have a faith there is no deity/deities). At least on slashdot I’ve never noticed this behavior with any other religious group so these guys get pointed out.

Now the reason these guys piss me off. They are blaming religion as the one and only factor for terrorism in the world. These people are claiming if it weren’t for religion all would be well. Guess what guys you’re being hypocrites here. You are pretty much saying your group is so morally superior that if all other groups ceased to exist the world would be perfect. That’s hypocritical because that’s what all extremist religious people say. If you don’t want to be associated with religion and religious people STOP ACTING LIKE THEM (them being specifically the extremist zealots).

Anyways I just needed to get that out of my system.

Apparently the American Flag is Offensive?

I’m going to try to control the storm off foul language that’s currently running through my head…

http://cbs11tv.com/local/patriotism.at.office.2.1020415.html

So for Memorial Day Debbie McLucas puts up an American flag in her office (located at Kindred Healthcare). This is a pretty common thing to do in America, which is where she is. But her boss (shit head) and a supervisor (douche bag) found the flag offensive. They both told her she needed to take it down.

Well apparently she didn’t (good on you Debbie) and Mr. Bag did it for her. She came into her office to find the flag on the floor (completely against flag protocol).

Well eventually Kindred Healthcare posted a statement on their website (no link was given by the news article so I can’t reference it here, sorry) which stated the following…

“The disagreement was over the size of the flag and not what it symbolized. We have invited the employee to put the flag back up.”

So the flag was three foot by five foot at that’s too big? Hmm… I know my company has a full sized flag hanging on a flag pole right outside of our office. I know this not just because I walk by it every day but also because we replaced the flag on Memorial Day. We also gave the old flag to the local VFW for proper disposal.

Anyways being two people said the flag was “offensive” I don’t think the take down had anything to do with size. This is standard company speak for “We fucked up and don’t want to accept blame for it.”

What the Hell has a country come to when you can’t even display that country’s flag?

Here is the contact information for the company…

Kindred Healthcare
Corporate Headquarters
680 South Fourth Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202

502-596-7300
800-545-0749

web_administrator@kindredhealthcare.com

Source: http://gunrightsradio.com/forums2/index.php/topic,1782.0.html

It’s the Gun Store’s Fault

No story to link to on this one. This post is more or less going to be a rant about one of the dumbest ideas ever, blaming the gun dealer for a criminal’s activities.

I don’t remember where I saw this but a group of people were outside of a gun store protesting because a criminal (who wasn’t one at the time of purchasing his gun) obtained his firearm from the store. The protesters were trying to blame the store owner for selling the man the gun even though the man passes a background check (and of course anti-gunners love the idea of background checks).

Now maybe I’m dense enough to have my own event horizon but I don’t understand how you can blame a gun dealer for the actions of one of their customers.

Let’s compare this to the automotive industry. There is a massive number of D.W.I. fine written out every year. This is because people are stupid enough to drink booze then attempt to drive.

If we follow the earlier mentioned protesters’ logic we should be blaming the automotive dealers every time a drunk driver kills somebody in an accident. Just like the gun dealer the automotive dealers are simply selling a product to another person. They don’t know what the buyer is going to do with the car they sell them. For all the dealer knows the buyer could be planning to use their newly purchased car to attempt to kill the Dutch Queen (Google it).

Hell we might as well just go all out. We may as well blame Target for selling a kitchen knife if it’s used in a stabbing. Why not blame Best Buy when somebody uses a computer purchased there to write a computer virus?

The reason we don’t blame the automotive industry, Target, or Best Buy for any of the mentioned actions is because most of us are smart enough to realize they didn’t have a hand in any of those actions. They simply sold a consumer a product. But according to some people this concept is no longer relevant when a gun is involved. What the Hell makes gun dealers responsible for doing the exact same thing GM (oh wait they aren’t selling cars) Ford (who aren’t selling many) does?

This lack of logic is what I hate about the anti-gun movement. Every argument they made can be stricken down by actual facts and the light use of logic. Their arguments are based entirely on emotions. Generally that emotion is a fear of guns. But as with most emotion driven arguments logic isn’t the basis. In fact logic is strictly ignored for if it were used the argument would not be viable.

Soon not Having a White Roof will be Illegal

The things “scientists” will say to get a piece of that Al Gore’s Apocalypse “research” money…

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6366639.ece

Apparently if we all paint our roofs white it will reduce carbon emissions (you know the stuff plants use to perform photosynthesis and create oxygen) as much as removing all vehicles from the roads for 11 years.

I’m tossing this one in the “I want global warming money so here is a crackpot idea” pile. Sadly if this “research” catches on you know the current administration will seriously consider a law that would make it illegal to have a roof that isn’t white. Cripes.

Man Threatening to Jump Off Bridge is Lent a Hand

Another interesting story from dvorak.org…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8064867.stm

A man who was threatening to jump off of a bridge in China got pushed off by a passer by. When asked why he pushed the man off the passer by said he was fed up with the jumper’s “selfish activity.”

As they say be careful what you wish for because you may just get it.

Source: http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/05/23/bridge-jumper-in-china-gets-a-“helping-hand”/

The FCC Think They can Search Your Home

Arrogance becomes you FCC…

http://techdirt.com/articles/20090521/0939414961.shtml

The FCC believe if you have any device that could interfere with the operation of other devices (in other words any electronic piece of gear) they can invite themselves in to search your house. And we’re not talking at pre-arranged times and dates but anytime they damn well please.

So the spooks aren’t the only people who think they can search your premises without a warrant.

National Park Carry Law Signed

Obama actually did it, he signed some pro-gun legislation. Of course it was tacked onto his precious credit card bill of rights…

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4901

We won’t be able to carry in parks until February 22, 2010 but we won this battle. Once again I don’t like the idea of having attached it to, what I consider, a bad bill but then again the Antis have been using this method for years. I wonder how they like the taste of their medicine. I bet it tastes like defeat.

Of course I’ll throw out the standard disclaimer that winning this battle shouldn’t make us feel confident. We still need to fight just like we did with this bill. If we keep fighting this hard more victories should be imminent.

FTC Considering Regulate Blogs

Well this figures, I was reading Snowflakes in Hell and came across a rather scary news article…

http://techdirt.com/articles/20090519/1030204931.shtml

The Federal Trade Commission is considering sticking their fingers in bloggers’ business. They want to require bloggers who review products to disclose whether the product being reviewed was given to them, is a sponsor’s product, or if the reviewer is getting paid to do the review.

Up next requiring bloggers to be “fair and balanced.”

Source: http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2009/05/21/government-looking-to-regulate-blogs/

Right to Repair Automobile Law Put Forth

It’s about time a law was put forth that removes all the barriers between automobile computers and their owners…

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/05/right-repair-law-pro

Strangely enough it’s being proposed by Bob Barr and Ralph Nader. I never thought I’d see a day when these two people agreed on something.

The bill would make proprietary computer systems with lockout mechanism illegal for use in automobiles. As it stands right now automotive manufacturers like to make their vehicles as hard to work on as possible. They do this because they make a huge chunk of change when you bring your car in for work. This would allow a person to diagnose their own problem and possible fix it themselves or have an independent mechanic do it (which is normally a LOT cheaper).