Now we're talking. I won't miss this one.
Just to get my comments a litte more back on-topic: I do agree with much of Bill Thompson's sentiments about some of the problems with the internet, and the fact that certain forces U.S. are doing some very shifty, distasteful things, treating the internet and digital information as some sort of "eminent domain", simply to offer favors to certain businesses. These corporations, and the politicians they have bought don't have a clue what civil liberties really are, nor do they care. In spite of the power they wield,
they are not at the core of what America is really about, and are rarely representative of your typical middle-class American's attitudes. Most of us are as disgusted by these things as the rest of the world.
But it really baffles me to see Mr. Thompson lumping together Libertiarians and free-market thinkers with this sort of behavior. Those corporations and bought politicians are not in ANY way interested in a free market, nor in individual civil liberties. They are interested in power; end of story.
I, as a civil libertarian, find it quite ironic that Bill T. talks out of one side of his mouth about those awful capitalists and their civil liberties, while at the same time maintaining that each country should be free to choose on its own how to connect to the web. Of course! What libertarian would be against that? (only a hypocritical one)
So what I object to is not the complaint of abuses of power, etc... but in how he characterizes the struggle ("Damn the Constitution"? -- the Constitutions's authors are rolling over in their graves from the DMCA and it's like). Let's face it, the U.S. government invented the internet, like it or not. It was a government project in the 60s.
But, once it turned into a public force in research and education, it ceased to be a "thing", to be "taken back" by anyone. It is simply a collection of publically available protocols, which anyone can run, whether connected to others or not. Bill Thompson can run his own neighborhood internet for all I care. Run some CAT 5 from house to house, keep out all outside connections, and voilá: it is a private internet, or whatever you want to call it (hoodnet?). Here's another one for you: did you know that you don't have to use the ICANN-controlled internet naming system? There is always AlterNIC, or you can even start your own TLD root server, using any set of name extensions you want. If you can talk other people into pointing their DNS servers to it, then so much the better! In other words, to wind up my wordiness, the internet is a
collaborative system. Collaborate to whatever degree you want.
Now I know that unfortunately the clueless politicians don't understand the above concepts, so they try to enact laws to close this supposed Pandora's box. It's not going to work, no matter what anyone says. Too many alternatives out there. So the only discussion worth having about all this is: in exercising their freedom of networking, is anyone violating anyone else's property, freedom, etc... in any way. Those doing so should be stopped, whether they be governments, corporations, hackers, whatever.
I know I mentioned above to avoid
ad hominem attacks, but I can't resist this one, because Bill Thompson kind of set himself up for this: on the "about" section of his personal website (
he mentions "In 1995, while I was working at PIPEX, I built one of the first personal pages on the World Wide Web.". HUH!?! I built my first web page in 1995, and as I recall it, building web pages had already become commonplace. I actually considered myself a clueless newbie latecomer because hadn't done one back in '93 or '94. -------------------------------------------
"Now, this might cause some discomfort..."
(