RE: [ga] Why the .XXX Domain is a Bad Idea That Won't Die
At 09:33 30/01/2007, Dominik Filipp wrote: Very good conclusion, Jeff! I guess we are closer to the source of all problems than we might expect... at last some start understanding! They control the IANA through the IANA REF 4646 LSERegistry size and this way appeal on/make pressure on ICANN. Read back my mails on ISO. The target is to launch "standard.google.com" to control the world standardisation process and to profile standardisers as well as standard's users, because standardisers are the true masters of our standardised world. From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - On Behalf Of Jeff Williams Exactly and more to the point or point's right here Chris. Another MONEY related benefit would be nearly directly to Google for many obvious reasons. Doesn't Vinton still work for Google? Isn't he still also a Bod member of ICANN? Jeff, I suggest you read RFC 3869. The whole Internet money and technology issue is there. This was a plea of IAB for the Internet R&D to be financed by the Govs, to stay free from commercial stakeholders. The future of the Internet is languages and semantic, and will interfere with the way people think (and decide to buy). Look at the Unicode consortium, who are the Members and who are the individuals. It was lead by IBM and Microsoft, now by Google and Yahoo! and Verisign. This consortium exchanged BoD Membership and last two IETF Chairmanship (IBM and Google Boys). Its President is the author of RFC 4646, he was IBM and now Google. jfc
|