I'll ... go ahead & say it ...the full of shit list. info! dot's ,dot's ... our freedom is a stake! ... "they" r not out in the woods/hills ...these mother fuckers ...r at the ..door!!! ...read !,scourer the web?,PERUSE sites ! ...NOT just here ! gather as many opinions ,from as many sites as you can ......NOT just LIKE minded sites? & stop buying the "MAIN STREAM" bull shit !!! .....there is an stirring ,going on ........i know you can feel it ! sense it & i am not talking about all the "shit" --"they" r doing 2 us ! .... do u C ... Y do u think at this time ,in history "they" r bombarding us so? ...we r awakening :) & i am not Talking about that end of world 2012 ...bull shit! or transhumanism ,gene changing,mixing DNA !!! ..."they" don't want u & i 2 talk 2 each other ...maybe find out ... we R all , friends , bothers/ sisters. calm yourselves, steady, steady, listen ??? .... don't u sense it :) .......this generation has been chosen ...called! ..it is us ! LOVE will win the day! FREE WILL ,CREATIVITY , each 1 of us IS unique, unparalleled, unprecedented...we r 1 of a kind! & "they" hate that! ..."they" can do better? "they" hate HIM ....who's Blessing's ... knows no barriers! & i am so :) 2 spend this brief 8 moment in time ...with you.
Perhaps more useful is this map, in which the signing countries are in black and the non-signing are in red. You might notice a few patterns.
Also, reporter Dave Burstein kindly sent along the full list
(embedded below), with signatories in green, non-signatories in red and
everyone else in white. The "everyone else" apparently includes
countries who haven't paid up their dues and thus can't technically sign
on yet, or who don't "have their credentials in order." In other
words: bureaucratic blah blah blah. Europe, of course, dominates the
non-signing countries. It's somewhat meaningless, but if you tally up
population, the signatories cover 3.8 billion people, while the
non-signatories cover 2.6 billion. And there are another ~600 million
in play in those other countries.
So, what does it all mean? Very little right now. Even those countries that signed on still need to go through a ratification process -- and one hopes that people in some of those countries will realize that it's bad to be supporting a regime that wants political bureaucrats having anything to do with the internet, even if it's dipping a toe in the water. However, many of the countries don't much care about that, and simply want the new rules so they can try to control parts of the internet (and/or profit from it). The rules won't actually go into effect for a while. While they aren't binding, it is pretty customary for signatories to eventually adopt such rules locally.
The real story here is a world in which there are two competing visions for the future of the internet -- one driven by countries who believe the internet should be more open and free... and one driven by the opposite. Whether or not the ITU treaty is ever meaningful or effective, these two visions of the internet are unlikely to go away any time soon. The next decade is going to be filled with similar clashes as certain countries seek to limit what the internet can do, for their own political needs and desires. Seeing the initial breakdown of who's in which camp is useful, but this isn't over yet.
Who Signed The ITU WCIT Treaty... And Who Didn't
from the the-full-list dept
We already noted this morning that the US, a bunch of European countries, and a sprinkling of other nations around the globe have refused to sign the new ITR agreement put together at the ITU's World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT), even as ITU officials congratulate themselves on a job well done. Many people have asked who signed and who didn't. The ITU has an official list of signatures, which seems to slightly conflict with some earlier reports. Here's their graphic:
So, what does it all mean? Very little right now. Even those countries that signed on still need to go through a ratification process -- and one hopes that people in some of those countries will realize that it's bad to be supporting a regime that wants political bureaucrats having anything to do with the internet, even if it's dipping a toe in the water. However, many of the countries don't much care about that, and simply want the new rules so they can try to control parts of the internet (and/or profit from it). The rules won't actually go into effect for a while. While they aren't binding, it is pretty customary for signatories to eventually adopt such rules locally.
The real story here is a world in which there are two competing visions for the future of the internet -- one driven by countries who believe the internet should be more open and free... and one driven by the opposite. Whether or not the ITU treaty is ever meaningful or effective, these two visions of the internet are unlikely to go away any time soon. The next decade is going to be filled with similar clashes as certain countries seek to limit what the internet can do, for their own political needs and desires. Seeing the initial breakdown of who's in which camp is useful, but this isn't over yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment