[governance] Have there been any statements re: PRISM from the "technical community"

[parminder]

On Monday 10 June 2013 08:07 PM, Kerry Brown wrote:
> 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.

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.

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.....

BTW, the directors' note 
<http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/ITfC/AnnualReport2011-12/Annualreport_Directorsnote.pdf> 
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."

It is almost literally borne out by PRISM revelations...... Apologies 
for a bit of 'we told you' indulgence here...

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....

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.

parminder





>
> Kerry Brown
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130611/047eb0cb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t