Re:Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’
by rasengan on Tuesday January 12, 2021 @09:14PM
(#25757118)
> People want the Network, and in our era it so happens that's the Internet (previously it was the Public Switched Telephone Network, and before that the Universal Postal Union).
You're absolutely right in that it changes.
> Historically most attempted revolutions fail.
Yet, my statement still stands: Historically, revolutions happen all the time. Risk of failure is not a reason not to proceed. As they say, "give me liberty or give me death!"
> ICANN's control of the DNS root is by consent
I agree with you completely. Let's see for how much longer the people will consent to their rule vs a democratic rule by the commons!
Yeah, no, that's not how this works. People don't want your "new internet". People want the Network, and in our era it so happens that's the Internet (previously it was the Public Switched Telephone Network, and before that the Universal Postal Union). But it isn't your "new internet" of a few enthusiasts who are sure it'll work this time even though it hasn't worked the previous times it was tried.
> Is there any good reason why we shouldn't own our own names?
A name is what something is called. In London there is a famous river crossing which was officially named after an equally famous politician. William Pitt (the Elder). But people didn't call it "William Pitt Bridge" or even "Pitt Bridge". People called it "Blackfriars" because that's the district of London it is in. Nobody you ask in London will know where "Pitt Bridge" is. There is no "Pitt Bridge" you want "Blackfriars".
Perhaps you've never visited London. Lots of HN folks are from Silicon Valley. San Francisco has a bridge that joins the city to Oakland, I happen to believe it should be named after the Emperor, "Norton Bridge" seems like a good name. But is that what it's named? No, because even if a few agree with me, on the whole people call it the "Bay bridge" and a name is what something is called.
This seems to be a hard concept for some people to manage, but it's mandatory, so there isn't anything I can do about that.
> Historically, revolutions happen all the time.
Historically most attempted revolutions fail. In hindsight it is often clear they could never have succeeded. I think Americans have a fairly recent memory of what failed revolution looks like.
> So actually, the DNS root is owned by some company that is under the jurisdiction of California law.
In practice (and perhaps this will annoy tptacek but too bad) this isn't usefully true. ICANN's control of the DNS root is by consent, the same way that say, the English Parliament is sovereign by consent, so just because California law says they can do something does not in fact mean it will have the effect envisioned in California law.