<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Monday 10 June 2013 08:07 PM, Kerry
Brown wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:A0615421071EDD4A9F851117D67D538A82561DEB@EXCH01.KDBSystems.local"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I don't know if this counts as the "technical community" but it does provide a plausible technical scenario.
As an aside I am really getting tired of the us vs. them conversations. We are a community that is made up of communities. Many people have their fingers in many communities. There is a lot of overlap. Trying to reduce every conversation to sides is not useful and only causes division when we should be seeking unification and consensus.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
It is not about general goodness and oneness of all people - all of
which is very well. This is about self identified political factions
and actors in the global IG space. A certain organised technical
community has vehemently self identified itself as a political actor
in the global IG space, and participates in all of its political
activities with a remarkably consistent, and one may observe,
largely pro-US, political stance. It is the response of this
politically organised technical community to the PRISM episode which
was sought by Michael.... It is of course not about just any techie
making a comment on this issue. BTW, Edward Snowdon himself is a
techie, but that means little vis a vis what we understand as the
technical community in the political IG space.<br>
<br>
This particular technical community, for instance, is very vocal
about the so called threat of a UN control of the Internet.
Obviously then, it is of interest to many to know its views on the
US control of the Internet. This political faction - the so called
'technical community' - cannot become selectively political, and
then apolitical and non-committal when it suits it, and also
selectively 'concrete' and precisely expressive and then suddenly,
diffused and uncharacterisably plural, when it suits it..... <br>
<br>
BTW, the <a
href="http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/ITfC/AnnualReport2011-12/Annualreport_Directorsnote.pdf">directors'
note</a> in the IT for Change's last annual report (2011-12) spoke
of "the spectre of a global cyber control
room where big business and United States government agents sit
together,
scrutinising and controlling the minutest details of our world,
employing the new global neural system of ICTs."<br>
<br>
It is almost literally borne out by PRISM revelations......
Apologies for a bit of 'we told you' indulgence here...<br>
<br>
Remember, the courtesy extends both ways - while the US based big
business helps further US's political interests, US government
fights globally on big Internet business' behalf for lax privacy
laws, low or no intermediary liability (even when it is otherwise
justifiable) and in general no regulation of global Internet
business....<br>
<br>
If we wish we can still remain blind to this patently manifest, by
far the, biggest power centre on the Internet, and consequently what
should be the most important target for public interest governance
of the Internet, and keep exclusively focussing our IG advocacies
elsewhere. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-"</style><br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:A0615421071EDD4A9F851117D67D538A82561DEB@EXCH01.KDBSystems.local"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Kerry Brown
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>