[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ICANN-EU] meeting esther dyson - a very short report
- To: "McMeikan, Andrew" <andrew.mcmeikan@mitswa.com.au>, "'icann-europe@fitug.de'" <icann-europe@fitug.de>, csif-l@jca.apc.org
- Subject: RE: [ICANN-EU] meeting esther dyson - a very short report
- From: Harald Alvestrand <Harald@Alvestrand.no>
- Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:18:35 +0200
- Cc: "'Andy Mueller-Maguhn'" <andy@ccc.de>
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- In-Reply-To: <54A50136B6CAD3118FBD00C00D00DDEF037393@mits_perth_com1.mitswa.com.au>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
At 17:01 25/10/2000 +0800, McMeikan, Andrew wrote:
>In my mind if the system is going to change to a truly de-centralized one
>then some infrastructure needs to be in place to achieve this. That means
>something that can not be shutdown or controlled by any government
>anywhere, with all the power for changes in a distributed web of trust,
>outside of legislation, tm-mark laws or UDRP action.
>
>Does anyone have good reason why a linkage of private, corporate and
>organizational networks could not be managed in this way?
There is not trust enough left in the world to operate critical global
resources based on a newly built web of trust.
consider: those who support ICANN, AND the governments, AND the microsofts,
AND the political parties, would have to be *participants* in the web of
trust, because they are Internet users. How much would you be able to trust
them?
The rule of law *is* a web of trust.
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, alvestrand@cisco.com
+47 41 44 29 94
Personal email: Harald@Alvestrand.no