<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Internet Demographics Changed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/</link>
	<description>a bloomin &#039;buzzin&#039; confusion since March 2005</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:57:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barnhard Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bureaucrats doing someones work</title>
		<link>http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/comment-page-1/#comment-19755</link>
		<dc:creator>Barnhard Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Bureaucrats doing someones work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 21:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barnhard.nl/?p=252#comment-19755</guid>
		<description>[...] idea of policing the whole internet really is an idea of this government, might they wake up some old dogs at the EU and UN [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] idea of policing the whole internet really is an idea of this government, might they wake up some old dogs at the EU and UN [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: netpolitical</title>
		<link>http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/comment-page-1/#comment-414</link>
		<dc:creator>netpolitical</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2005 08:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barnhard.nl/?p=252#comment-414</guid>
		<description>The PRC has a national policy which would place intolerable restrictions on my 
communication with the people of &lt;a href=&quot;http://english.www.gov.tw/UN/index.jsp?categid=126&amp;recordid=52554&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Taiwan&lt;/a&gt;.
The EU&#039;s improvident alliance with the PRC threatens that communications ability.

(And, parenthetically, I&#039;d point out that ICANN supervises the &lt;a&gt;IANA function.)&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The PRC has a national policy which would place intolerable restrictions on my<br />
communication with the people of <a href="http://english.www.gov.tw/UN/index.jsp?categid=126&amp;recordid=52554" rel="nofollow">Taiwan</a>.<br />
The EU&#8217;s improvident alliance with the PRC threatens that communications ability.</p>
<p>(And, parenthetically, I&#8217;d point out that ICANN supervises the <a>IANA function.)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Administrator Barnhard.nl</title>
		<link>http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/comment-page-1/#comment-413</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator Barnhard.nl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2005 04:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barnhard.nl/?p=252#comment-413</guid>
		<description>Could you explain what the EU in your response would and could &quot;steal&quot;? If any, it would only remove access to it own build network by the US and quite the current coalition with the US. You find that harse? Let&#039;s look at the stakes..
  
ICANN is &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.icannwatch.org/icann4beginners.shtml&quot;&gt;already 100% &quot;politicization&quot;&lt;/a&gt; and 0% technical.  There is much critics on the UN plans, however I doubt that the current ICANN has no corruption or a higher moral ground. The great thing of ICANN is that it would never surface because ICANN is not accountable. Moreover, why need having an US government veto? Doesn&#039;t really support the idea of an equal relation either. There is a bunch of great theories that China, Arabs and Germany want to ban and install spy-equipment (What about the CIA?)... All would in either case, better have a world consensus against it than just one country. Doing things together rules.
 
ps. netpolitical, thx for your input and response, this topic has been lacking dialoge, off course response  to this comment is appreciated  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could you explain what the EU in your response would and could &#8220;steal&#8221;? If any, it would only remove access to it own build network by the US and quite the current coalition with the US. You find that harse? Let&#8217;s look at the stakes..</p>
<p>ICANN is <a href="http://www.icannwatch.org/icann4beginners.shtml">already 100% &#8220;politicization&#8221;</a> and 0% technical.  There is much critics on the UN plans, however I doubt that the current ICANN has no corruption or a higher moral ground. The great thing of ICANN is that it would never surface because ICANN is not accountable. Moreover, why need having an US government veto? Doesn&#8217;t really support the idea of an equal relation either. There is a bunch of great theories that China, Arabs and Germany want to ban and install spy-equipment (What about the CIA?)&#8230; All would in either case, better have a world consensus against it than just one country. Doing things together rules.</p>
<p>ps. netpolitical, thx for your input and response, this topic has been lacking dialoge, off course response  to this comment is appreciated  <img src='http://barnhard.nl/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: netpolitical</title>
		<link>http://barnhard.nl/2005/11/02/internet-demographics-changed/comment-page-1/#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator>netpolitical</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 22:12:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barnhard.nl/?p=252#comment-412</guid>
		<description>Dear great god in heaven.  Last month, Viviane Reding&#039;s public message on internet governance was &quot;Hand over your shit now, punk, or we break it.&quot;  It didn&#039;t go over too well with Americans. 

So this month you&#039;ve refined your message into, &quot;We have a bigger gang than you do, so you&#039;d really better hand over your shit now, punk&quot;.

I&#039;m afraid people understand this kind of &quot;diplomacy&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear great god in heaven.  Last month, Viviane Reding&#8217;s public message on internet governance was &#8220;Hand over your shit now, punk, or we break it.&#8221;  It didn&#8217;t go over too well with Americans. </p>
<p>So this month you&#8217;ve refined your message into, &#8220;We have a bigger gang than you do, so you&#8217;d really better hand over your shit now, punk&#8221;.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid people understand this kind of &#8220;diplomacy&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

